Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 19, 2020, 08:27:53 pm
News: 2020 U.S. Senate Predictions are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Gustaf, Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  LC 4.4: Lincoln Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act (Tabled) (search mode)
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: LC 4.4: Lincoln Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act (Tabled)  (Read 473 times)
Representative fhtagn
fhtagn
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,870
United States


« on: September 17, 2019, 08:07:39 pm »

Does anyone in favor of this actually understand how semiautomatic firearms work? Does anyone understand how many modern weapons are semiautomatic?

How is this a "weapon of war"?


Do the sponsor and supporters of this not know that fully automatic weapons are
1. Already heavily regulated
2. Not common
3. Not used in mass shootings
Why ban something that isn't harming anyone?

Why should a manufacturer be held responsible for someone misusing their product? Is it acceptable to sue Ford if a drunk person drove an F150 and caused an accident?

What do you suppose people will do with their already owned and legally purchased property? The government can't just make people give them up, and Lincoln clearly doesn't have the money to offer adequate compensation for people turning them in.

Who is enforcing said laws? The police? Remember, Lincoln contains cities that don't have the best reputation with the police and their citizens. You know what's likely to happen? Minorities will be the ones targeted for owning a harmless semiautomatic pistol.

You know who else gets hurt by these proposals? Women. There's been a huge rise in women purchasing a firearm, especially pistols, for the purpose of protecting themselves. Many women feel safer because of this, especially if they purchased one following violent acts being done against them, or if they live alone.

What is the penalty for breaking these laws?

It seems S019 this didn't actually bother doing any research, and it seems those who have already come out in support need to do their research as well.
Logged
Representative fhtagn
fhtagn
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,870
United States


« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2019, 10:58:14 pm »
« Edited: September 17, 2019, 11:08:57 pm by The C Word »

This bill does not take away people's existing firearms. Nowhere does it say that and nowhere has a supporter of the bill, to my knowledge, said that.

This bill is designed to curb the sale of these especially dangerous weapons that no private citizen has a need to own. One does not need to own a AK-47 in order to feel safe. Personally, I do not believe anyone needs to own any firearm to feel safe, but I recognize that I would not win the argument.

Simply having these kinds of guns around makes our region more dangerous. The theory of a good guy with a gun is a myth. Having more guns around means there are more opportunities for them to misfire in the grocery store, or for someone to get a case of road rage and open fire on the highway, or for a disgruntled teenager to lose their fight with mental illness at open fire in a classroom. I don't want to see these horrors happen any longer.

Lincoln must take action, and we must take it now.

It literally says in the bill that possession is banned.

The only way that can reasonably be enforced, is by taking away people's guns.

SECTION II: ASSAULT WEAPON BAN

1. There shall be a regiowide ban on the purchasing, sale, or possession of assualt weapons, these weapons include semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns, which can accept detachable magazines, as well as revolving cylindrical shotguns.

Did you even read the bill?
Logged
Representative fhtagn
fhtagn
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,870
United States


« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2019, 10:49:32 pm »

I'd like to see someone address what is wrong with current regulations on fully automatic weapons?

Whether or not someone "needs" one is irrelevant. What good reason is there for a ban when they currently aren't harming anyone?
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC