In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
NRA lawyer attacks assault-rifle ban
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
NRA lawyer attacks assault-rifle ban
04/24/02
Bill Sloat
Plain Dealer Reporter
Cincinnati
- A 1994 federal law that restricts access to assault rifles is riddled with loopholes that allow similar semi-automatic weapons to stay on the market, a National Rifle Association lawyer said yesterday.
Information from Our Sponsors
Lawyer Jim Warner told a three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the federal ban should be struck down as unconstitutional because of the confusion it creates.
But Assistant Attorney General Michael Raab said the banned weapons have been shown to be a threat to public safety.
Warner and Raab are on opposite sides of a lawsuit challenging the ban filed by two gun manufacturers and two gun dealers.
The appeals court did not say yesterday when it would issue a ruling. Typically, such cases take months to decide.
Warner said the only banned guns are listed in the law, while others that "have the same rate of fire" are still readily available.
He also argued that a semi-automatic assault rifle with a flash suppressor on its muzzle could be illegal.
But one without a flash suppressor could be sold to hunters.
That scenario prompted Judge Charles R. Simpson to wonder out loud, "Is it easier to kill a squirrel if you have a flash suppressor?"
Flash suppressors were designed for rifles used in combat. The devices hide the flash that emerges from the barrel of a rifle when it is fired.
A flash can expose where troops are positioned on a battlefield.
Raab said Congress wanted to limit access to dangerous weapons that were traced back to criminal groups by federal law enforcement agencies. He said statistics were compiled to show the names of weapons that needed to be banned.
"All [the statistics] pointed in favor of Congress pointing out these weapons for special treatment," Raab said. "Congress reasonably drew the line where it did."
http://www.cleveland.com/community/plaindealer/index.ssf?/xml/story.ssf/html_standard.xsl?/base/news/10196406582230927.xml
Contact Bill Sloat at:
bsloat@plaind.com, 513-631-4125
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
04/24/02
Bill Sloat
Plain Dealer Reporter
Cincinnati
- A 1994 federal law that restricts access to assault rifles is riddled with loopholes that allow similar semi-automatic weapons to stay on the market, a National Rifle Association lawyer said yesterday.
Information from Our Sponsors
Lawyer Jim Warner told a three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the federal ban should be struck down as unconstitutional because of the confusion it creates.
But Assistant Attorney General Michael Raab said the banned weapons have been shown to be a threat to public safety.
Warner and Raab are on opposite sides of a lawsuit challenging the ban filed by two gun manufacturers and two gun dealers.
The appeals court did not say yesterday when it would issue a ruling. Typically, such cases take months to decide.
Warner said the only banned guns are listed in the law, while others that "have the same rate of fire" are still readily available.
He also argued that a semi-automatic assault rifle with a flash suppressor on its muzzle could be illegal.
But one without a flash suppressor could be sold to hunters.
That scenario prompted Judge Charles R. Simpson to wonder out loud, "Is it easier to kill a squirrel if you have a flash suppressor?"
Flash suppressors were designed for rifles used in combat. The devices hide the flash that emerges from the barrel of a rifle when it is fired.
A flash can expose where troops are positioned on a battlefield.
Raab said Congress wanted to limit access to dangerous weapons that were traced back to criminal groups by federal law enforcement agencies. He said statistics were compiled to show the names of weapons that needed to be banned.
"All [the statistics] pointed in favor of Congress pointing out these weapons for special treatment," Raab said. "Congress reasonably drew the line where it did."
http://www.cleveland.com/community/plaindealer/index.ssf?/xml/story.ssf/html_standard.xsl?/base/news/10196406582230927.xml
Contact Bill Sloat at:
bsloat@plaind.com, 513-631-4125
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878