The Assault Weapons Ban Was Not The Goal

I look at at of these people celebrating their "victory". The ban was not the goal here. The goal was to move the "Overton Window" so that you will all think that what they really want isn't so bad. Moving the window also increases the likely hood of a real BAN later. What they really want now is expanded background checks which is just backdoor registration. You don't really believe that they delete record of who got their pre-purchase background check done, do you? What really scared them was all of the underground weapons. Weapons people have had forever that would get sold between individuals. Now, they will push for background checks on those sales as a "compromise" ad many idiots will fall for it.

reply to post by DarthMuerte


Yup, maybe so.

It's the same kind of mind-screw that the oil companies pull all the time. First, gas prices go up 50, 60 or 70 cents... people get angry and then, they drop 20 cents and the media howls 'gas prices falling!'.

Ahhhh. All better again.

reply to post by DarthMuerte


National registration has been going on for a very long time now.

Between dealers keeping 4473's on file for 20 years and eTrace tracking every gun cops come into contact with if they really wanted to know who has what they can find out with a little legwork.

Sure, your grandads Marlin wont be in the system but any gun bought at retail since '68 is essentially registered.

Lump into that things like pistol permits, FOID cards, hunting licenses, individual states which register directly like CT, NY, and MA and we already have a national registry of firearms. It just requires a few phone calls by anyone investigating you or your gun.

The calvary always charges in when new laws are proposed but where are they when the real fight, the fight to repeal all this garbage legislation on our heads now, is concerned?

Read up on the National Tracing Center and you'll wonder what all these politicians pushing for registries are wasting their time for. It already exists.

I wouldn't say I disagree with this original post but I would not say that the original goal of this grand opera was never to ban guns.

One thing worth mentioning is that we now know where the people of the US stand. They are divided, they can't even agree on what freedoms they want. Some are perfectly fine with TSA, others thing it's the devil. Some want ALL GUNS banned, some want gun laws to stay the same and others are all levels in between. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing, but we have now seen that the American people's psychology is easily manipulated - even when it is against their own freedom.

A 'victory' for me would be defined as the members of the 'antigun agenda' ( or any agenda to restrict the 2nd amendment ) to come out and say "you know, we learned something and we changed our mind and now we want to stand behind and support the 2nd amendment". Instead, these anti-2nd amendment people STILL exist and still will push propaganda and efforts to continue their agenda. They now know they can gain a support from some of Americans and even a majority of the media can be used to support them.

Another thing I would like to add is that, in a conspiracy fashion, those who conspire and set agendas of this caliber are not new to their game. They are patient, they are cunning and they are good at what they do. They can roll with the punches, and they have not just one plan, but a back up plan for each and every minor circumstance.


As I mentioned, and I feel the OP here would support this, a victory would be the american people united celebrating the 2nd amendment. Instead they are divided, most are pretty careless about it in a way.

If it were me conspiring against the 2nd amendment, I would roll with it. As the OP here mentions the new efforts to have all things registered and obtaining a firearm now more of a hassle.. This is likely going to simply make the firearm culture further away from those 'less dedicated'. When something can be obtained easily, legally and without the requirement of a month or more work/planning - lots of people become involved and are familiar with it. Something that requires more effort, like say "cave spelunking" less people will be involved in it. Cave spelunking, how many people do you know who do it? You have to live near or be able to drive far to get to a decent cave - you have to afford and be knowledgeable in what equipment to have - you have to be physically fit and mentally trained to know how to do it. That's why no one you know likely does it ( I just set myself up for that ONE member who knows someone or does it himself to come and say something ). I believe the growing efforts will make firearm owning and usage much like cave spelunking - a hassle to get into, only the truely patriotic/commited will engage in it... The common man busy with the failing economy and life in general will have a hard time getting into firearms.. And because of that, in the future another attack on the 2nd amendment will be easier.

Thanks for the post hope my response is worth addition.

The goal was to sell weapons and ammo for the lobbying industry.

This was a bipartisan strategic scare tactic marketing ploy to sell weapons and ammo and they were successful.

Follow the money and you will see that it doesn't make any sense for them to ban the sales of assault weapons as it would heavily impact a large lobbying industry.

reply to post by interupt42


I think that's part of it, another was creating more partisanship and scaring people into sticking with the two party system. Last years election showed a small but significant shift of Conservatives out of the Republican party. That's bad for both dominant Party's.

This whole thing has preyed on the fear of Right and Center voters. To liberals, they bombarded them with guns are killing children, to the conservatives they bombarded them with liberals want to take your guns away. The emotional response to both is to vote for candidates backing the action you feel is right, making you more prone to vote a candidate that has significant support.

the democrat treehuggers are well known for getting what they want by doing it in small bits.

they are also know for using the court system to upgrade the rules and cover more then the laws they do get passed were ever meant to cover.

we have seen it in calif where they put in a buffer zone around a state or federal park. then a couple years later they turn it into a wilderness area that they put a buffer zone around. then they add the wilderness area to the park and change the buffer zone into wilderness area and put in another buffer zone around it.