Burnt Orange Report


News, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas







Support the TDP!





September 09, 2004

Can anybody hook a person such as myself up with an AK?

By Jim Dallas

Starting Monday, the answer is... sortof (to the extent that any AKs not banned by previous legislation will be legal).

CNN: No vote to renew Assault Weapons Ban

Regardless of your feelings on this (and my feelings are mixed), why do I get the feeling that Frist is making stuff up?

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congress will not vote on an assault weapons ban due to expire Monday, Republican leaders said Wednesday, rejecting a last-ditch effort by supporters to renew it.

"I think the will of the American people is consistent with letting it expire, so it will expire," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, told reporters.

The 10-year ban, signed by President Bill Clinton in 1994, outlawed 19 types of military-style assault weapons. A clause directed that the ban expire unless Congress specifically reauthorized it.

The Daily Cougar had an article about this on Tuesday.

P.S. Yes the title was changed, on the grounds that it was potentially offensive.

Posted by Jim Dallas at September 9, 2004 07:26 AM | TrackBack

Comments

You get the feeling that he's making it up because he is. 77% of the U.S. population want the Assault Weapons Ban to stay in place. I have problems with the cosemtic nature of the law, but I like the precedent that it sets that allows Congress to regulate firearms. Despite the wishes of the NRA, the 2nd Amendment is not absolute. No one in their right might would argue that any of the amendments are absolute and subject to no limitations, all they say is that there needs to be a compelling state interest at stake for those rights to be limited, and there needs to be no less burdensome way of accomplishing that regulation. No one has applied this to the 2nd Amendment yet, but they ought to. We need a strong statement that guns can be regulated, so long as they are not done so in an overly burdensome way. Until the Supremes suck it up and actually say something about this, Congress needs to keep ramming legislation through to force the issue.

Posted by: utlaw guy at September 9, 2004 10:39 AM

Thank you for another insensitive headline. Please, do us all a favor and take a class at UT in diversity awareness.

Posted by: Joan at September 9, 2004 04:07 PM

Guys, gun control is not a winning issue. We Dems should not ride this bandwagon. It defeated alot of Congessmen in 1994 (like Jack Brooks who had served ca. 40 years) and certainly was a factor in the election in 2000 (especially in WV).

Besides, for all the hyperbole, gun violence with Assault Weapons has actually been pretty historically low. I guarantee far more people are killed with cheap "Saturday Night Special" handguns than assault weapons.

Posted by: WhoMe? at September 9, 2004 08:33 PM

OK, but is "brother, can you spare a dime?" insensitive by the same token?

It's used in the same sense.

Posted by: Jim D at September 9, 2004 09:04 PM

I wish more rural Democrats would talk about gun control. I know they want to, but most have wised up and buried that issue and now just tow the NRA line. It's amazing what happens when they actually vote how the district feels. They get re-elected

Posted by: Allan Bartlett at September 10, 2004 12:05 AM

"Brother, can you spare a dime?" does not sound racially insensitive to me. It is a phrase that I imagine predates your offending phrase by decades at least. Without doing an internet search, it sounds like a widely used depression- era phrase. I think the word "brother" is used in a different sense than in the other phrase.

"Can you hook a brother up with an AK-47" certainly does sound as if you are playing on racial stereotypes.

Posted by: Jack at September 10, 2004 01:47 AM

Personally, i think that Kerry could stump speech that Bush supports drug dealers, murderers and ( eek) terrorists by not supporting a renewal of the weapons ban. What I just don't get about Americans is how they will defend to the bone the second amendment and not allow any regulation of weaponry, but roll over and accept Patriot Act investigations and searches without regard to the 4th amendment, which regulates illegal search and seizure.

Posted by: grnwayrob at September 10, 2004 10:27 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?








March 2005
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    


About Us
About/Contact
Advertising Policies

Donate

Tip Jar!



Archives
Recent Entries
Categories
BOR Edu.
BOR News
BOR Politics
Linked to BOR!
Polling
Texas Stuff
A Little Pollyana
Austin Bloggers
DFW Bogs
DMN Blog
In the Pink Texas
Inside the Texas Capitol
The Lasso
Pol State TX Archives
Quorum Report Daily Buzz
George Strong Political Analysis
Texas Law Blog
Texas Monthly
Texas Observer
TX Dem Blogs
TX GOP Blogs
Daily Reads
College Blogs
GLBT Blogs
More Reads
BOR Webrings
Election Returns
Texas Media
World News



Powered by
Movable Type 3.15