US Senator Scott Brown said Monday that it should be left up to lawmakers in individual states to decide whether to approve new bans on assault weapons.
The senator’s comments follow a shooting rampage in Colorado that left 12 people dead and 58 others injured at a midnight screening of ‘‘The Dark Knight Rises.’’
Comments
Don't be a tool, Scott.
... because all those checkpoints along the state borders will keep things controlled.
Girls with assault rifles are sexy-hot!
If even one state allows them, they'll proliferate.
This comment has been removed.
This comment has been removed.
Thanks to Scott for a clear and unambiguous display of his decision making.
The problem with the Senator's assertion is that the Supreme Court has already ruled (McDonald v. Chicago, District of Columbia v. Heller) that the 2nd Amendment applies to individual states.
This comment has been removed.
It might not stop them completely, but it would almost certainly reduce the number of people killed.
The Problem here is that if Obama HAD pushed the assault rile ban, you'd be attacking him for that. As you yourself say: " Yes, I've posted nearly the same point daily for the last four years or so. Daily, I get to mock and satirize the daily rants and unhinged, delusionalism of liberals and Democrats who contribute to this (news)paper. I appreciate your example of hypocrisy in taking no offense to the Globe's daily rants." The only one using this tragedy to push an agenda is you. Get help.
p.s. Thanks for the reminder of yet another Romney flip-flop. Is there anything either of you believe in?
Us "liberal demagogues" feel that it's terrible that a tragedy like the one in Aurora is so readily facilitated by our gun laws. You're damned right we're going to use the focus this brings to advocate for more effective gun regulation.
This comment has been removed.
Senator Brown, this is the quintessential example of a case where the law is only meaningful when enforced on a national scale. If Massachusetts bans assault weapons, but Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, or Vermont do not, what good does it do us? And that's to say nothing of the currently preferred method: buying online.
Thanks for the reminder of yet another Romney flip-flop. Do either of you have core beliefs?
Thanks for the reminder of yet another Romney flip-flop.
This is not practical as policy. Right now, weapons flow into Massachusetts from New Hampshire. You cannot have a state-by-state policy on this, it's too easy to cross state lines with the guns.
How can the states regulate guns when the Supreme Court has constantly struck down any gun control efforts? We need leadership on this issue, not sound bites. It is an absolute red herring that gun control would infringe upon hunters. A person claiming the need for a concealed weapon for personal protection should have to prove that they are not delusional or paranoid. The risk of a person who is so frightened of being harmed carrying a gun in public pales in comparison to the risk they present to the public and the public's right to safety. A person seeking gun ownership aught to show a real need for the gun. Need a hunting rife? You better have a hunting license. The 2nd Amendment has been construed to the absurd. The NRA represent the gun manufacturing industry.
TheSystemWorked: Thanks for the reminder of yet another Romney flip-flop. Yes, Romney did sign the nations first assault weapons ban, saying "That's not going to make me the hero of the NRA." Now, of course, he claims to be a life long NRA member.
Weird - it didn't show up for two hours, then all of a sudden appeared.
Can Scott Brown really be this stupid? The Mass law is easily circumvented by driving to other states or buying through the internet. Only a national law would reduce the availability of assault weapons. BTW, what's so bad about extra checks to possess certain dangerous weapons? We already do it for grenades, machine guns, ... . Why not add assault weapons to the list of weapons needing extra checks?
Scotty Brown is counting up all the cash the NRA stuffs into his barncoat pockets so don't expect a word of criticism from him about the absence of gun laws and the proliferation of guns. All Senator Centerfold can see is "votes for me & more $$$ for me." Expecting principles and integrity from him is like expecting them from Willard "Flip" Romney.
Sen. Brown is mostly correct in this particular view. But there are a couple of exceptions to state regulation of long guns, including Thompson submachine guns and similar weapon designs as well as Browning Automatic Rifles and such. Those need to be registered with federal authorities, as do any sort of automatic assault weapon. There are gun owners who demand that they have a right to 'hunt' with a U.S. M-4 or similar assault rifle. Imagine the grouse or rabbit slain by such a gun. The issue of handguns is more troublesome than long guns as clips for pistols are becoming more sophisticated and turn the gun into a close approximation of an assault weapon. There needs to be a debate over registration of ownership and licensing of certain modes of pistol, whether by state or federal authorities.
Seems like Budapest104a is the paranoid scaredeycat frightened of anyone carrying a gun in public. It seems like Budapest104a sees anyone carrying a gun in public as a likely gangbanger.