|
Wonderful, yes truly wonderful statistics observed
around guns into the North American landscape. In the year 2000 there were
on average 10.4 on every 100.000 in the population. Calculating on this is
one out of every 1000 in a decade, and on a lifespan of 70 years there are
0.7% of the entire population killed from guns.
That is a lot, and therefore one could wonder how to double or triple
these numbers. A first step into that direction would be the nice assault
weapons back on the streets, according to the infinite wisdom of the NRA
these kind of weapons are not different from others so what's the problem?
If there are 'responsible citizens' who like the rough look of those
banned assault weapons they simply must have the freedom to get one.
Or do you not agree with this and do you wonder that if
there truly are no differences 'under the motorcap' found than this stuff
can easily return into the selling shops? But 0.7% is some interesting
figure and I just wonder how to double this.... Could that be done, could
it be?
Quotes found on the Toronto Start, written by Tim
Harper.
____________________________________________________
Return of assault weapons feared in U.S.
1994 ban on semi-automatics lurches toward expiry date
Issue expected to play pivotal role in presidential election
WASHINGTON; They go by names that suggest power and danger
the "Streetsweeper," the TEC-9, the MAK90, the AK-47. And that's exactly what these military-style assault weapons bring. The power to kill indiscriminately. Now there is fear here that the bullet-spraying semi-automatic weapons are heading back to American streets. The gun debate in the United States has moved back to the forefront as a 1994 ban on assault weapons lurches toward an expiry date and it promises to become a pivotal issue in the next presidential election. U.S. President George W. Bush surprised many when he distanced himself from the powerful National Rifle Association during the 2000 campaign, advocating an extension of the assault-weapon ban that ends in September, 2004. But there are signs here that Bush now appears to want to have it both ways, tacitly supporting the extension to court suburban support in key states, while doing nothing overtly to stop a move that could see Congress simply avoid a vote on the extension and let it die. That would be a powerful nod-and-wink to the firearms lobby, which, by some accounts, poured $1.6 million into the 2000 Bush campaign. "Does George W. Bush want to be known as the pro-assault weapon president?" said Joe Sudbay, the public policy director of the Washington-based Violence Policy Center. "He may be trying to have it both ways now, but it will be pretty clear by Sept. 13, 2004. He either supports the extension or he doesn't ... he either extends it or he doesn't." The 1994 law made it illegal to import, manufacture, transfer or possess 19 types of semi-automatic weapons, although the law was "grandfathered," meaning anyone who legally owned such weapons before that date could retain them. Tom DeLay, the Texas Republican and House of Representatives majority leader, said last week he didn't believe the extension would come to a vote in the Republican-dominated House. DeLay's statement drew a surprising rebuke from the Republican Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, showing that the gun ban does not easily cut across Republican-Democrat lines in this country. While many Democrats are fearful of defeat if they are targeted by the gun lobby in the coming elections, there are many Republicans representing so-called "soccer mom" suburban constituencies who could become electoral toast if they are seen to be backing a measure which would bring the deadly weapons legally back to the streets of America. White House spokesperson Ari Fleischer said last week Bush has not had any change of heart from his 2000 campaign promise. But he offered no explanation as to why Bush has given no presidential muscle to the promise. He has not been shy about stumping the country pushing for his tax-cut proposals, but has said nothing publicly about assault weapons. "The House does everything the president wants," New York Democratic Senator Charles Schumer said. "He wants a dividends tax cut, they do it. He wants one bill or another, they jump. In fact ... they say `how high?' He's got to walk the walk (on guns). If the president wants this bill to come to his desk, it will. If the president doesn't, he can have his minions whisper to the House, `kill the bill,' and he'll never reach it." In 1994, the ban passed the House by a mere two votes, but it has been something less than a rousing success, even the anti-gun lobby concedes. Many weapons manufacturers simply cosmetically changed the specs on the weapons to circumvent the ban, cynically adding "AB" to their model numbers, indicating they were changed "after the ban." In 2000, 28,653 died of gunshot wounds in the U.S.; 94 children and teens in Louisiana alone. The gun death rate during that year was 10.4 per 100,000 population. The Violence Policy Center released a study last week indicating that 41 of 211 law enforcement officers gunned down in the line of duty between Jan. 1, 1998, and Dec. 31, 2001
almost one in five were felled by assault weapons. During a three-week reign of terror last October, the Washington snipers used a modified Bushmaster assault rifle, an XM15 M4 A3. The company's sales have soared since 1994. The teens behind the 1999 Columbine massacre used modified TEC-9s. "There's not a dime's worth of difference in the performance characteristics between the guns on the banned list and the guns not on the banned list," said NRA executive vice-president Wayne LaPierre. Anti-gun advocates want an even tougher ban to replace the 1994 law, but, right now, there is little hope in Washington the law will be improved. It is more a question of a dogged fight to keep the status quo. Bryan Miller of Philadelphia knows something about fight and he doesn't buy the conventional Washington spin. Miller joined the advocacy group CeaseFire PA after his brother, an FBI agent, was slain at District of Columbia police headquarters in 1994. It was a case of mistaken identity. The gunman, carrying a concealed TEC-9, was looking for the head of homicide. Mike Miller was in the "cold case" squad. "He went the wrong way ... but somebody was going to die, anyway," Miller said. Since then, Miller has worked tirelessly to control guns in his country. "These guns are ugly," he said in an interview. "We have tapes of those kids firing away in Columbine. We have families of victims and people like me who have lost loved ones to these guns. "We have lots of support. And we are just getting
started."
____________________________________________________
Comment on the end of this long quoting stuff; Since the
'White House silence' gives me some opportunity to
start some kind of 'sniper project' I am considering to put the figure
under the name of Wayne LaPierre (NRA executive vice-president) on place
number two. On number one we still have Jesse 'can't stand people jerking
of at America' Helms of course, but the Wayne dead head could be on place
nr two.
On the other hand, this sniper project was to be supposed in use of the so
called 'war on drugs' so I am considering this. Just considering....
And as always, there will be no
complaints. No complaints, how come this my dear America? Is that because
your War on Terror is just one big lie after all? Is that the reason of
the silence?
Back
to Part 21b
|
