John Kerry will say anything for political points:
Citing the 9/11 commission and other reports, Kerry said that al Qaeda, blamed for the attacks on America three years ago, had issued a manual that urged followers to “come to America and buy assault weapons.”
“Why is George Bush making the job of terrorists easier and making the job for America’s police officers harder?” he asked in a separate written statement.
The Massachusetts senator told a town hall meeting in St. Louis: “You can’t fight a war on terror and you can’t make our streets safe … (by) selling assault weapons in the streets of America.”
The Assault Weapons Ban has nothing to do with the War on Terror. Maybe some graphics will help explain:
John Kerry proudly waves an ‘assault weapon’ which was given to him at a rally in Racine, WV. The gun would be banned if Kerry gets his way, and like other assault weapons, was responsible for ZERO deaths in the War on Terror.
Box cutters, which will not be banned in the Assault Weapons ban, which were the weapon of choice in the deadliest day in American history.
Earlier in the piece, Kerry stated:
“It’s real, we’ve got a war,” Kerry said. “But we should do more than just talk about it and try to scare people about it and make it a political issue.”
Indeed, you two bit hack.
Steve
Well, oddly enough, I came to this post via DickHeads site, aka Oliver Willis. His post had you saying it was “a-ok for assualt weapons to be running wild on the streets”. What a liar he has become (must have rubbed off from David Brock).
Justin O.
I firmly believe assault weapons should be banned, and a slew of other handguns.
It’s ridiculous……
How can you let one person have a gun that can kill or injure 30 people in a matter of seconds?
That’s not gonna happen with a handgun or a shotgun.
In 1989, there was a school shooting when I was in Kindergarten at Cleveland High School. 5 kids were killed and 29 children and a teacher I knew, who was a friend’s mother by the man Patrick Purdy whom was a student at the school some years before. He was armed with an AK-47. I can say if there wasn’t an AK-47 on the street, we wouldn’t have this problem, or it wouldn’t be as worse, if you have a handgun or a shotgun, or even a hunting rifle, there is no way you can do as much damage as he did on that day.
I’ve been against guns since an early age. I’m very upset to see the assault weapons ban not get passed again, this is ridiculous, I could only imagine how much more deaths will occur because of these weapons being sold. This time they are going to be marketed by the NRA, so guys, get ready for happy shooting. Cuz the NRA said so. Hey it’s alright, 2nd amemdment protects the right to own an ak-47 or uzi eh? Damn, Americans sure need one of those hidden away and loaded, we’ve been waiting for those.
sean mccray
supporting a right that you like is easy. The real test of a democracy is when you support the rights of those you dont like.
sorry. How many crimes are actually committed by these assault weapons?? Not many. Most murders are not, and most robberies and property crimes are not. it’s a Red herring.
In the story above about the school.Not clear on how many people were killed, you said five, but then you mention 29. Its all about perspective. I say an armed security guard at the school (or gasp! armed teacher) would have ended that real easy.
What was the age of the assailant? After all, was he even legally suppose to own a gun?
Addison
Justin:
Sadly, it is evident that you don’t know what you are talking about. Purdy did not have an AK-47, for one. For another, a shotgun would have made him far more lethal at the ranges he was shooting.
But most importantly – Purdy was deadly, because he went somewhere where he was the _only one with a gun_.
JohnO
People can be split into 2 groups-law abiding citizens and those who disregard the law. Banning weapons (including assault rifles) will keep those weapons away from only ONE of those 2 groups. This leaves those more likley to commit crimes with superior firepower. It’s really that simple.
I heard Kerry’s speech that Al Quaida cells in America had been “instructed to purchase assault rifles” here to carry out their carnage. This, to Kerry, is reason to continue the ban. So while Kerry acknowleges that terrorists are in this country and intend on becoming well armed, his response is to disarm the citzenry from defending itself.
-keith
JustinO. you’re confused and need some education.
“Assault Weapon” is a politically made-up term that simply describes how a particular semi-auto rifle look “scary” to some people. That even includes some semi-auto shotguns.
Fully-automatic weapons are “machine guns” – like those used by the child-butchers in Chechnya (or if you’re a tweaked dickhead like Michael Moore: “freedom fighter”) that maybe can kill 30 people in a matter of seconds, that is if you can hold on to it good enough to keep it from jumping out of your sweaty hands.
Machine guns were banned in the US a long time ago.
A semi-automatic “assault weapon” is not a full-automatic assault rifle – it is a term in search of a reference. It cannot kill 30 people in a matter of seconds, and since the ban was put in place even the Centers for Disease Control has reported that there has been no visible net effect of increased deaths whatsoever. It is a law without meaning, utility, or purpose.
If someone has an illegal AK47 that is a full-auto machinegun they have broken a lot more laws that are a lot more severe and pre-date the stupid, cosmetic-only, Clinton “assault weapon ban.”
Kirk Parker
Justin,
Not only what Addison said, but also you seem to be unaware of the fact (or dissembling, take your pick) that the AK-47 is separately banned and the sunset of the AWB will have no effect on its current prohibited status.
-keith
How come Kerry’s never wearing any eye or hearing protection in these bogus “Friend of Gun-owner” photos?
Dean
Y’all are arguing with someone who seriously believes that we fought the recent Iraq War for the sake of OIL.
Please, folks.
Justin O.
Sorry I meant injured 29 children and 1 teacher. Patrick Purdy is also know n as Patrick West, and he did use an AK-47 to correct your statement Addison on Jan 18 1989. There was a song by Macabre, ‘Killed 5 and Wounded 30’.
And AK-47’s will be allowed back on the streets and the NRA will market them like candy.
Hey Dean, oil was the major outlying cause, it’s really suspicious when you have all these oil employees supporting war where there is the 2nd largest black gold suction cup in the world. And now what the fuck does Iraq have to do with a school shooting? Are you gonna use that every time someone doesn’t agree with you, this dude believes in that shit that I don’t believe in, so let’s laugh at him on this subject. Coming from a guy who supports gun control guys…..
It’s the most used rifle in the world according to ak-47.net
Look just because your the only one with a gun, doesn’t mean you can’t be subdued, if that dude had a pistol, or a shotgun, it’d be a different story. And to be real, the chance of subduing anyone with a gun is low, and you can always say that a person with a gun is safer, but why the fuck are there all these guns in the first place?Having low regulation is going to mean more problems….worlds a whole lot different that when the 2nd amemdment was set. There’s a whole lotta irresponsible gun owners today than yesteryear, registered or not, and to promote guns in society of today is insane. It’s outta control when they allow this shit back on the street. That one more gun creates tons of possible problems that could occur with a gun that’ll kill someone in a second.
Dean
Justin O:
It’s one thing if you were simply supporting Kerry, or believed that we should spend more on alternative energy, or somesuch. “War for Oil,” in my book, puts you into the “Clinton had Vince Foster and Ron Brown and 200 other people murdered” crowd. Which is to say, if you’ll believe that, you’ll believe most anything, and more to the point, rational argument won’t go very far.
But, on the off-chance that you are amenable to argument, as opposed to political talking points:
What is an assault weapon? Based on the law that just sunsetted, what makes a weapon an assault weapon?
What aspects of the weapon, affected by the sunsetted law, makes a difference in terms of the prospects of committing a crime?
Was Patrick West’s weapon legal or illegal? If illegal, why would another law have mattered? How would the assault weapon ban have made any difference?
On what basis do you argue that the AK-47 will be readily available?
On what basis do you claim that there are a whole lotta irresponsible gun owners, and more to the point, that those numbers are increasing? Does the fact that crime rates have DROPPED affect your argument/beliefs at all?
billy
an AK-47 is a machine gun. Machine guns have been illegal since the 1930’s.
The AWB is feel good legislation that has been exposed as such. The media is “playing on our fears” if I can quote Mr. Gore (as he says people who refer to 9/11 do).
Tomorrow morning I’m heading to a gun show to buy myself another fine pistol. And next weekend, after the AWB has expired, I’m gonna go buy a scawwy-looking semi-auto rifle that is, functionally, no different than my Remington model 7400. In fact, I’ll probably grab a few high capacity clips for both – just because I can.
Mouths and guns are similar, once you shoot either one off, you can’t do a damn thing about the damage you may cause. In either case, I don’t see the point in punishing the masses for the mistakes of fraction of thoughtless idiots.
Addison
Justin:
I don’t take my facts from songs from obscure bands. I’ve noticed that they tend to be rather… less rigorous in fact checking than even CBS news.
Purdy did not have an AK-47. I say this with absolute certainty. And some pedantry. An AK-47 is a selective fire (capable of full or semi-auto) rifle produced in the USSR from 1947 to 1959.
Purdy had a semi-automatic rifle. Not selective fire. (And as I recall, manufactured in China). Regardless. The “Assault” Weapons Ban didn’t stop the exact kind of weapon from existing – I purchased a SAR-1 in 2000. I just don’t have a bayonet lug on my rifle.
The NRA doesn’t market anything. You really are just a dittohead, aren’t you?
Had he a pistol, he’d have been as deadly. He had the motive – which is what’s required. He’d have been deadly with a crowbar. Or glass bottles filled with gasoline with a lit rag in the mouth.
And a shotgun, at under 30 yards, is the deadliest handheld weapon we yet have invented. Which seems to keep eluding you. Had he had a shotgun, he’d have done even worse. Nobody could have “rushed” him – he was the only one with a weapon, and the motivation to use it.
Remove weapons from society, and leave the motivations the same, and you’ll find that things will degenerate exactly as they have in England – where the innocents barricade themselves inside, and hope that the criminals will pick someone else.
Justin O.
Billy, that’s fine you do what you want with your time, so you can spend money on things ‘just because you can’.
I live in one of the worst areas in Sacramento at the time being, I hear a few shots every once in awhile, but the chances of something happening to me are very slim, and I’m not going to add to the problem by purchasing a gun myself waiting for some fucked up shit to happen, that ain’t a way I’d live my life.
Yes the NRA does promote guns!
Purdy did have an AK-47, there is nothing you can say that would take that away Addison.
Addison, it’s not like he probably had a set count of people he wanted to kill, I mean he never did this before, he just went psycho. He was very dilusional, and reloading a shotgun or a pistol would have taken more time to reload than the ak-47. HAHA, I think it’s a big fucking difference between a crowbar and a gun, you can stop someone hitting someone with a crowbar, when there is a gun involved, it’s a different story alright? You can’t compare that shit for this incident. It’s insane to say he’d be just as deadly and yeah if he had some molitoves I don’t think there would have been as much deaths, there was a fire safety system at the school, I don’t think Patrick was any Randy Johnson either alright? So he wasn’t going to be just as deadly with a crowbar or a knife or a molitove cocktail, you just can’t compare being able to pull off what he did without what he used. People are going to be able to run away when they see someone getting hit with a crowbar, or at least apprehend him, the chances of doing that are sky high above apprehending someone with a gun.
Zleeper
When the fuck did the Centers for Disease control keep track of shootings?
Also, you have your head up your ass:
“The number of firearms-related injuries in the U.S., both fatal and non-fatal, increased through 1993, but has since declined steadily.”
http://medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNSTAT.html
Also to help you get your head of your asses:
http://medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNINTRO.html
How can you possibly think that the ban is from the Clinton era, jsut because it was passed in ’94, when it was James Brady (remember, he took one to his head for Ronnie Raygun) who started the call for this ban, and he and his wife are still actively calling for its passage. You fucking gunnuts don’t get it. The Second amendment gives people the right to bear arms ONLY when there is no regulated Milita. Now, if you wish to state that since GW has raped the state’s militas that it is now up to citizens to bear arms to protect the country, I might agree. But otherwise, you all need to sit the fuck down and shut up, cause you ain’t got any fuckin more rights to own a 100shot clip (Which the ban covers) than anyone else.
Brian
Letter sent to Kerry by the President of the NSSF…
September 8, 2004
VIA FACSIMILE
The Honorable John Kerry
SR-304
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Kerry:
On behalf of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the recreational shootings sports industry, and our over 2,300 members including firearm and ammunition manufacturers, I want to take this opportunity to congratulate you on the gift of a Remington shotgun you accepted from Cecil Roberts, International President of the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA). I trust the receipt of this gift by you complies with applicable federal law. I hope Mr. Roberts also took time to help you understand how your recent votes against firearm manufacturers threatens to throw hundreds of his union workers onto unemployment lines. Your claim to be a friend of gun owners is hypocritical, at best. You are a co-sponsor and leading supporter of legislation that could ban the very shotgun you so graciously accepted and possibly turns tens of millions of law abiding gun owners into criminals.
In March of this year, you and Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) led the fight to kill The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (S.659) by attaching “poison pill” amendments. This job-saving legislation would have prohibited the reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt and destroy our industry. You played a leadership role in blocking this legal reform bill that overwhelmingly passed the House, and enjoyed the broad bi-partisan support of a majority of your Senate colleagues. Your actions threaten the existence of the U.S. firearm industry. Mr. Roberts understands the significance of this legislation and on September 23, 2003, sent you and your colleagues the attached letter urging co-sponsorship and passage of this important legislation. In his letter urging the measure’s passage to protect union jobs and our industrial base he told you,
An issue that is often overlooked … is the economic impact the closing of our firearms industry will have on workers and their communities. In most cases these plants are located in rural areas and are the largest employers in the community. Nearly 1000 UMWA members work for Remington Arms in Ilion, one of the largest employers in Herkimer County in upstate New York.
In the state of New York, where our members work for Remington Arms, 179,400 industrial jobs have been lost since January 2001. We need to take steps to protect and encourage growth of our industrial base, including our firearms manufacturers. You can do that by co – sponsoring and supporting S. 659.
As you gleefully shook your new shotgun in the air, you knew your votes to kill S. 659 held the very real potential of condemning tens of thousands of workers — including union workers– living in states such as West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Tennessee, and New York to the unemployment line.
The bankruptcy of America’s gun industry holds critical national security consequences. If opportunistic trial lawyers colluding with anti-gun politicians like you are successful, our military and law enforcement will be forced to go offshore to purchase the firearms that guarantee our freedoms and protect us from terror. Your legislative attacks against our industry will place our security and hard-fought liberties hostage to the political whims of French, German, or other foreign leaders who could block such a sale.
When you reported for duty in the Senate last year you co-sponsored The Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003 (S.1431). Your legislation would ban the very shotgun you held aloft as well as many other models of semi-automatic shotguns, some built over a century ago. Literally overnight, millions of gun owners who go afield to shoot turkeys, geese, ducks, pheasants, small game or trap and skeet could be considered criminals in possession of what you would classify as a “semi-automatic assault weapon.”
America’s firearm manufacturers urge you to stop using your “photo-op poses” to divert attention from your attempts to destroy our industry and throw thousands of our workers onto the unemployment line. We are proud of the quality firearms we make. As your hometown of Boston acknowledged in court, “members of the firearm industry have a longstanding commitment to reducing firearm accidents and to reducing criminal misuse of firearms.”
Having seen pictures of you afield from your staged photo-ops, we urge you to read carefully the manufacturer’s safety instructions that accompanied your new shotgun and to take a hunter safety course. Perhaps by actually using your new shotgun — either hunting or at the range — instead of as a prop for PR ploys, you will gain a greater appreciation of our sport and decide to renounce your longstanding legislative assault designed to destroy our industry and the Second Amendment you claim to support.
Sincerely,
Doug Painter
Brian
Reading over the comments I’d like to clarify a few points regarding firearms law, “assault weapons”, and machine guns for the benefit of the uninitiated. I worked for a dealer in the past and we were also Class 3 dealers as well.
A fully automatic firearm (aka, machine gun, or select fire) refers to a firearm that will fire continuosly when the trigger is depressed. It will fire until the trigger is released or the magazine is empty. I will also suggest that they are not as easy to use effectively as the movies suggest.
A semi-automatic (aka, autoloader, or in DNC parlance “assault weapon”) fires one shot with each press of the trigger and no more.
FDR signed into the law The National Firearms Act (NFA) in 1934. It placed considerable limitations on the sale and transfer of numerous firearms among them fully automatic firearms, short barreled rifles and shotguns, and suppressors (aka, silencers). It is legal to this day to purchase any of these firearms IF you are willing and able to jump through the NFA hoops. They include submission of fingerprints, a photo, completion of an ATF form 4 that identifies the seller, firearm, and buyer. The ATF conducts an investigation of your background and the local authorities do likewise and the chief law enforcement officer in your area must sign the form 4 indicating that he/she has no issues with your owning on of these firearms in his/her jurisdiction. It take six to eight weeks to complete the process and you may not take possession of the devise until all the paperwork is completed. You must also purchase an NFA stamp for $200 per transfer or be a Class 3 dealer for $500 per year. If you give up the dealer status, all the guns must be sold/transfered or you must purchase a stamp and submit the documents for each gun. Since 1934 there have only been two crimes committed with a LEGALLY registered NFA gun. Both perpetrators were police officers.
In 1986, the Volkmer revisions were passed which, among other things, made the sale of fully automatic guns to civilians illegal. So, since May of 1986 no newly manufactured machine guns have been sold under NFA to civilians. What that means, is that when the existing guns fail, that is the end of them for civilians. At present they are commodities and fetch hansome prices to for those who own them legally. Further, the NFA restricts transport of these firearms across state lines. In order to move one, you must complete an ATF form and get permission to transport the firearm to another state, even temporarily, say for a match.
The Clinton AWB and other attempts to regulate so called “assault weapons” have preyed on this ambiguity in the public mind. Machine guns have been strictly regulated for decades and pose no threat to the public. “Assault weapons” are not easily converted. Not only is modification of the serial numbered part illegal, it is a dangerous undertaking that may well kill or injure the shooter when fired. The AWB relates to semi-automatic guns only and the end result is that the outlawed features have nothing to do with the operation of the firearm. It largely outlawed cosmetic features such as bayonet lugs, flash hiders, and pistol grips. So, it outlawed guns that look like machine guns but aren’t. Many of these arms are, in fact used for legitimate sporting purposes. Not that sports has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment. AR-15’s are the gun of choice in high-power matches and standard capacity handguns are used for IDPA and USPSA matches.
end of sermon……….
Stentor
Those are some fancy box cutters. Maybe I should upgrade mine.
Addison
Justin:
I’ve provided you facts refuting your assertations, and you’ve ignored them in favor of your emotional and illogical (and counter-factual) beliefs.
Thus, not only are you wrong, you’re actively working to perpetuate falsehoods and mischaracterizations. You’re helping my case more by your intentional ignorance than I could by continuing to refute you.
Addison
Zleeper:
“You fucking gunnuts don’t get it.”
Funny how people keep telling me that it’s the ‘fucking gunnuts’ who are angry and violent.
Actually, we do get it.
“The Second amendment gives people the right to bear arms ONLY when there is no regulated Milita.”
Incorrect. Actually, just non-sequitur. It would be amusing if you could cite a Constitutional authority to back up that view. But even if you could, there’s no “regulated Militia”
“Now, if you wish to state that since GW has raped the state’s militas”
Ah, you mean the National Guard. But that’s not a militia. It’s a reserve unit of the US Army. Otherwise, Bush couldn’t have ‘raped’ it. You’ve disproven your own assertation.
“you all need to sit the fuck down and shut up, cause you ain’t got any fuckin more rights to own a 100shot clip (Which the ban covers) than anyone else.”
Crude, rude, socially unacceptable, but correct. I don’t have any more right to own one than you do.
Luckily, as of today, that right is no longer infringed by stupid legislation. For you or me.
Justin O.
Addison it’s pretty funny how you think that there wasn’t an AK-47 used in the FUCKING SCHOOL SHOOTING I WAS AT, AT THE TIME! It’s an AK-47. READ UP ON IT ALREADY! IT’S AN AK-47
AK-47 = “The Kalashnikov rifle, also known generally as the AK-47, was developed in the Soviet Union in 1947. Semi-automatic versions of a Chinese model were imported in large numbers into the United States until 1989. These Chinese versions were produced by POLY Technologies and distributed in the United States by PTK International, Inc. The weapon is 34 3/8 inches long, and can accept 20-, 30-, 40- and 75-round magazines.”
And uh here goes info from the site of the creator of the AK-47 http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/
Addison it was an AK-47, either way you want it to be, it was an AK-47, swallow it.
Addison
Justin:
No, it was not. AK-47’s have never been legal in the United States. Though it is nice that you’ve done some research this time, and not just from indie bands – you missed the salient point.
The “Assault” Weapons Ban was focused on names. What something’s name was. Pro Forma over substance.
And Purdy did not have an AK-47. Those were *only* made in Russia, from 1947 to 1959. After that, the Russian ones were AKMs. Polytech imported a Chinese clone – not an AK-47.
Purdy’s gun was not full automatic (required for a AK-47), Russian (required for an AK-47), or made from 1947 to 1959 (see above).
Thus, it was not an AK-47.
It was a semiautomatic rifle. Blaming the name instead of the actor is silly, but it’s exactly what that law you appear to support did. I own a SAR-1. It’s made in Romania. Looks just like an AK-47, too. Works just like my M-1 Garand. or M-1 Carbine. Neither of which were addressed with the “A”WB. My SAR-1 didn’t have a bayonet lug, had to have several parts made in the US (US made rifles, such as Bushmasters XM-15s you might note weren’t affected) and had a pre-ban magazine that had been stockpiled included. I believe I know far more about the Kalishnikov family than you. I can discuss the relative merits of the Romanian, Hungarians, and Chinese. (Russian models are still specifically illegal, due to Cold War rules not changed)
Who’s hung up on inconsequentialities? You, who think a name AK-47!!!! AK-47!!! will kill people?
The law didn’t ban “assault” rifles, which were already illegal. Didn’t ban semiautomatic rifles, even. (They’ve tried that in Canada, it’s not going well).
Purdy was dangerous because he was the only person with a weapon, and the motive to use it. Kerry’s new shotgun, the 11-87 would have been deadlier. Semiautomatic, firing far more effective rounds.
It’s not the gun, it’s the person.
And no, it wasn’t an AK-47. That is a very specific gun, I previously gave you the definition. If you want to ban something, you’d better understand what you’re trying to ban. Obviously, you do not.
Justin O.
An 11-87 is not deadlier than an ak-47.
Why would dozens of the reports state Ak-47 than your single one which says otherwise?
How could a shotgun be deadlier than an assault rifle? You gotta reload helluva lot more often, and sure it does more damage but not in the sequential fire an ak-47 is capable of.
few shot spread vs continuous 30 or more shot fire…..
the latter is deadlier
Addison
Justin:
To finish this, because I’ve given you more time than you deserve – because I know what I’m talking about and you don’t.
If you want to continue the conversation, I’ll be happy to. At a firing range. I’ll supply the 7.62×39, ammo, 12 gauge, ammo, and pistols, if you’d like to compare them.
And then you’ll find out what I know about relative damage, and what each does.
As to “reports” most of them are from people in an intellectual circle-jerk – people with your opinions, no facts, no experience, telling each other what you think. Look at the reports from people who are experts. Who have experience. I’ve been around guns my whole life. I own a SAR-1. I own a 12 gauge. It’s the 12 gauge that’s loaded next to my bed. There’s a lot of reasons for that. I spend 2 weekends a month minimum at the range. My ammunition expenditures would likely shock you.
And yes, I’d take a 12 gauge over a 7.62×39 anything at house-to-house fighing any damn day. Because, all else being even, the 12 gauge is FAR deadlier. It’s not even arguable, except with people who _don’t know what they’re talking about_. *Ahem*. Figure out my email from above, it’s minorly munged. I’ll be happy to sponsor you at my range. Or introduce you to the guys who outshoot me monthly and are Certified instructors. Or check out http://www.kimdutoit.com. I think he’s got a list of bloggers who offer similar services.
But you don’t know what you’re talking about. Insisting this is about “AK-47’s” after being shown that it isn’t – (OK, counter me this: if what I say’s right – outlaw (again) “AK-47’s”. Notice all of us cackle and laugh. And keep buying our SAR-1s and MAC-90s. Wonder why we cackle when you pass a law saying we can’t have a “AK-47”). If you want to learn, I’ll be happy to dispense knowledge. If you want to stay ignorant, well, you’re not worthy of any more of my time.
Brian
Gotta agree with Addison. Inside of fifty yards there is nothing more lethal than a 12 ga. shotgun. Even with more frequent reloading, shotgun wounds, with buckshot are devastating. Further, the degree of precision required to effectively use a firearm that fires a single projectile is greater. Look at officer involved shootings in which a hail of gunfire produces a 10% hit rate. The AWB has lived on misinformation and a general misunderstanding of firearms and marksmanship, and terminal ballistics. Guns have nothing to do with Hollywood depictions of them.