What Panza and TMaster have said, with a fair amount of heat and passion, seems to be about right — and they've underscored what I was saying in an earlier comment. The anger and (in some cases) paranoia goes back to how the weapons were defined and described to the public — a public that still does not seem to have any idea what it is they're talking about when the phrase “assault weapons ban” is used.

I suspect (though I could be totally incorrect) that if Obama were to insist upon honest discussion about weapon types, an actual dialogue would be possible. There would perhaps even be agreement that some weapons really should be banned (though I'm equally sure there would be a percentage of folks who'd screech anyway).

But without honest, open discussion and clear definitions, an AWB will remain incendiary.

Rather the term “Assault Weapon” was a 'political Marketing' term, not a 'firearms technical' one. It was deliberately used in order to sow confusion between it, and the U. S. military's term “assault rifle” i.e. a rifle capable of fully automatic fire as long as the trigger remains depressed–and the magazine does not run out of ammunition.

The “Assault Weapons” banned by this law were 100% semi-automatic, i.e. when the trigger is depressed one round is fired. It was a “scary looking gun” ban whose supporters–including Bill Clinton–deliberately stoked public confusion and ignorance in order to achieve it's passage. The crushing defeat Clinton and the Democrats received in 1994, to which outraged 2nd amendment supporters contributed mightily, was IMHO well earned by their disgraceful tactics in this arena. One does not have to think that none of these weapons should have been banned to be disgusted at the way the politicians achieved their ends.

Spreading disinformation, and relying on (and even increasing) public ignorance is not what makes a democracy work; it's far more appropriate to a dictatorship. Bill Clinton's and the Democrats' willingness to use the tactics of dictatorship and tyranny on such a fundamental constitutional issue were a major factor, again IMHO, in the development of what became Clinton Derangement Syndrome.

The high number of ex-Clintonites in Barack Obama's Administration is no doubt contributing to the paranoia on the part of the NRA and others that Obama is going to go down the same road, just as soon as he/they feel strong enough to do it.

If eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, then these folks (as well as many people less paranoid then they) are damn well determined to be vigilant this time.

A: The utter ignorance of firearms several lawmakers display when the advocate a policy they have no understanding of, or

B. The intentionally deceptive rhetoric used by those anti-gun policy wonks who are taking advantage of the lack of knowledge the general public has regarding firearms.

Don't believe me? Check out what Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center, the guy who came up “assault weapon” ploy, had to say when he penned the reasons for the AWB policy:

” Assault weapons……..are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.”

http://www.vpc.org/studies/awaconc.htm

Sugarmann authored a book titled “The Case for Banning Handguns in the United States” He and others who advocate this policy have earned the term 'gun-grabber.'

Still don't think the AWB was a scam?

This gun was LEGAL while the ban was in place:

http://yfrog.com/0ppreowned032j

Now, pay attention, this gun was re-legalized after the AWB expired:

http://yfrog.com/0car15a2j

The second rifle has a collapsible stock and a bayonet lug. Oh no!!!

It was total BS, just a symbolic attempt to demonize gun owners while furthering the goal of encroaching on the individual right to own firearms.

The “compromise” gun control advocates have in mind is this: “We'll only take away fewer of your rights than we'd ideally like to have”

Its ridiculous, the guns pictured above, AR-15's, have been the most popular rifles sold in the United States for a decade.

The “assault weapons” ban is a NON-STARTER!!!!!

That just goes to show how silly this debate is.

And before you pounce all over me — I'm appalled by the “ZOMG, they're going to take away all the guns” rhetoric. It's exactly that type of flaming rhetoric that drives some of the less stable in our society over the edge. But I really am not at all sure everybody's on the same sheet of music here.

The vast majority of people I know who are angry about the “assault weapons ban” wrap up right here. I suspect that if the policy / law makers were to write something that coherently defined weapons properly, there'd be a LOT less hostility and/or paranoia.

I love Fox news. I guess its why its number one. Sorry for you hate spewing agenda driven lefties who cant take the truth.

Remember GWB once had a 70 percent approval rating too.

Thanks folks I got a million of 'em