Mass. Assault Weapons Ban
Looks like there is now a permanent ban on the aesthetic features of rifles in Massachusetts now:
Governor Mitt Romney has signed into law a permanent assault weapons ban that he says will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on these guns.
“Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts,” Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1 with legislators, sportsmen’s groups and gun safety advocates. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
I disagree. They are made for recreational purposes because that’s what I use mine for. I think those Korean shop owners during the LA riots may also disagree about the self-defense thing.
Mitt Romney, another RINO.
Update: Looks like those assault weapons serve a purpose after all since the police departments in Mass. are now getting them.
July 9th, 2004 at 12:43 pm
Therefore, Massachusetts police will be out hunting down and killing people?
July 9th, 2004 at 2:02 pm
Something else that just occurred to me: if these “assault weapons” are so deadly that they’re only good for killing people, WHY wouldn’t they be good for killing animals (a.k.a. hunting)?
July 9th, 2004 at 2:40 pm
I blogged on this earlier at
The shotguns, Webber said, could be dangerous to bystanders if, for example, there was an incident at the commuter rail station in town that required officers to shoot a criminal.
So, the “scary looking” “assault rifle” is safer to use in certain self-defense situations than a shotgun might be. But Sarah Brady, Dianne Feinstein, et al keep telling me that these weapons are designed solely to kill a lot of people in as little time as possible. And to think, John Kerry went out of his way to make sure he got his picture taken while hunting with one of those “lead-spraying street-sweepers”. What was he thinking? What about the CHILDREN, John?
July 9th, 2004 at 2:41 pm
oops…forgot the < / a>
July 9th, 2004 at 2:41 pm
never mind, you know what i meant
July 9th, 2004 at 11:59 pm
Thank goodness. Never again will a Massachusetts citizen die from a heart attack brought on by a scary-looking gun.
July 11th, 2004 at 4:16 pm
How about this sentence in the article: “For example, the rifles that Ashland has purchased are designed to hit a target from more than a 100 yards away.” If their officers cannot shoot better than this, the department had better schedule a lot of shooting range time.
Thibodeaux: the real assault rifle cartridges (the ones the military uses) are somewhat underpowered for hunting. I’m not sure what the Bushmaster A2 is, but the .223 round used by the M16/AR15 (US Army) and some Bushmasters is too small to take down a deer – it’s likely to run miles after it is hit and die somewhere you’ll never find it. The AK47 .30 caliber round is better, although it’s got low muzzle velocity for a rifle so you’ll want to get up close. (That’s usually necessary around here due to the density of the brush anyhow – no responsible hunter will shoot without a clear view to be sure of what they are shooting.)