If you get a chance, tune into Nightline tonight.

TONIGHT'S FOCUS: For 10 years, it has been illegal in this country to
manufacture or distribute some of the most deadly semi-automatic guns
in the world. The majority of the public supports this ban and at
least by some measures, gun violence has abated. So why are most of
the Congress, the President, and the Democratic contender for the
White House all looking the other way while this law is set to expire
next week, returning these assault weapons to the streets?

In 1994, Congress passed, and President Clinton signed the assault
weapons ban, effectively making 19 different types of semiautomatic
firearms and high-capacity magazines illegal. Of course, this wasn't a
complete ban - guns already on the market were exempted and an
additional 650 types of semiautomatic weapons commonly used for
self-defense, hunting and target practice were allowed. Critics and
supporters of the ban agreed that the law had flaws. But now, 10 years
later, polls show most Americans support the law.


--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 8 Sep 2004 12:38:31 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said:

some of the most deadly semi-automatic guns
in the world

Guess nobody ever told you how the Congress critters' staff decided how to
define an "assault weapon."

Apparently, no one told the Nightline staff, since that's what I
copied in my post. I think you should send them an email immediately.



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 8 Sep 2004 15:23:58 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

Apparently, no one told the Nightline staff, since that's what I
copied in my post.

Why am I not surprised?

I don't know... perhaps you're just stupid? Or, perhaps you're not
interested in listening to the issues.

You decided that I was the one who made this up, but when you found
out it was ABC, you attack them instead as left wing I suppose.

Go back to sleep Mr. Poodle, your bark is much less than your yap.




--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
If you get a chance, tune into Nightline tonight.

TONIGHT'S FOCUS: For 10 years, it has been illegal in this country to
manufacture or distribute some of the most deadly semi-automatic guns
in the world. ......

The fact of the matter is that these rifles are no more "deadly" than an
other gun. There only "flaw" (if you will) is that they look like the REAL
Assault Rifles used by the military. They are intended for civilian target
shooters who must (by the rules) use guns that look like current military
rifles to compete in military matches. Check the stat's - how many murders
are committed with them?


In 1994, Congress passed, and President Clinton signed the assault
weapons ban, ....

Yes and anticipating that the price of these guns would more than tripple a
federally licensed gun dealer named David Koresh bought 100+ legal semi-auto
receivers - the part BATF considers a gun - and an equal number of BATF
approved kits to make these into heavy-barreled target rifles. BATF then FBI
attacked and killed him and over 50 fellow Branch Dividians.

Sometime later DC police arrested two men carrying illegal full-auto Uzi
machine guns that had been illegally brought into the country after the ban.
They were released and these illegal machine guns returned when it developed
that they worked for Senator Ted Kennedy.

.... Of course, this wasn't a complete ban - ........

Do you know the difference between a banned rifle and a legal target rifle?
The banned rifle has a bayonet lug. How does that make it more deadly?

But now, 10 years later, polls show most Americans support the law.

Not in my neck of the woods.

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote

Apparently, no one told the Nightline staff, since that's what I
copied in my post. I think you should send them an email immediately.

Weren't they the ones who got caught rigging Chevy PUs to explode?

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 8 Sep 2004 17:03:00 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

You decided that I was the one who made this up, but when you found
out it was ABC, you attack them instead as left wing I suppose.

Really doesn't matter whether you made it up or some young ABC staffer made
it up. It was a silly statement.

Silly or not, it's a fact.


--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Vito wrote:
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote

Apparently, no one told the Nightline staff, since that's what I
copied in my post. I think you should send them an email immediately.

Weren't they the ones who got caught rigging Chevy PUs to explode?

I think that was another network, but you never know.



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 08:17:51 -0400, "Vito" said:

The fact of the matter is that these rifles are no more "deadly" than an
other gun. There only "flaw" (if you will) is that they look like the REAL
Assault Rifles used by the military.

You got it, Vito. The story, of which Jon is apparently ignorant, is that
when the Congress critters' staffers were writing the definition of "assault
weapon" their method was to go through a gun catalog and pick out features
that made a weapon _look_ like a real assault rifle. Any weapon with those
features was designated an "assault weapon" regardless of how it actually
operated.

Mr. Poodle is clearly the ignorant one. He thinks that it's ok to put
more guns on the streets.




--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

On 9 Sep 2004 12:51:59 -0700, (Jonathan
Ganz) wrote:

In article ,
Vito wrote:
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote

Apparently, no one told the Nightline staff, since that's what I
copied in my post. I think you should send them an email immediately.

Weren't they the ones who got caught rigging Chevy PUs to explode?

I think that was another network, but you never know.

It was NBC's Dateline program that did the GM gas tank program.

In article ,
felton wrote:
On 9 Sep 2004 12:51:59 -0700, (Jonathan
Ganz) wrote:

In article ,
Vito wrote:
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote

Apparently, no one told the Nightline staff, since that's what I
copied in my post. I think you should send them an email immediately.

Weren't they the ones who got caught rigging Chevy PUs to explode?

I think that was another network, but you never know.

It was NBC's Dateline program that did the GM gas tank program.

Well, there you have it ABC isn't credible.


--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."