| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| Gun Control Group Sues Justice Dept. |
| 2004-03-19 |
| WASHINGTON -- A gun control group filed a lawsuit Thursday accusing the Justice Department of aiding gun manufacturers in skirting assault weapons laws. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, along with the Million Mom March, said the Justice Department’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives allowed gun makers to replace the housing for the firing mechanism on legally owned semiautomatic assault weapons, which the groups say violates the 1994 Assault Weapon Act. The law makes it illegal for a person to manufacture, transfer or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon. Weapons possessed before the law was enacted are exempt. The Brady Campaign contends in its lawsuit that manufacturing a new housing -- or "receiver" -- is prohibited because that in effect creates a new gun, and that gun should be banned. "By allowing gun makers to manufacture new receivers, ATF has been allowing the manufacture of new assault weapons, in contravention of the statute," the Brady Campaign said in a statement Thursday. The suit names the Justice Department, ATF, Attorney General John Ashcroft, and Edgar Domenech, acting director of ATF. Neither the Justice Department nor the ATF would comment on the litigation. The Brady Campaign cited correspondence, gathered through the Freedom of Information Act, between the ATF and Bushmaster Firearms, a weapons manufacturer in Windham, Maine, in which the ATF outlines how to replace receivers in semiautomatic weapons. Dennis Henigan, legal director for the Brady Campaign, said the ATF policy "ensures that many thousands of grandfathered assault weapons will remain functional for many years to come. It is a policy that allows assault weapon manufacturers to manufacture new assault weapons to replace the damaged grandfather assault weapons," he said at a press conference. The Brady Campaign said the ATF policy of issuing new serial numbers for replacement receivers, as stated in the letter, demonstrates that the ATF is allowing semiautomatic weapon production. The ban on assault weapons has a sunset provision and is scheduled to expire in 2004. The renewal of the ban was part of a gun package that did not make it through Congress earlier this month. I’d like to take the entire staff of Brady and MMM to Iraq, somewhere along the border between Iraq and Iran, and march them across at gunpoint. It would prove two points: one, they’re all idiots, and two, what a true "assault weapon" does. Not that they’d learn anything - they belong to the group whose motto is "don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up". |
| Posted by:Old Patriot |
| #11 OK, fine. No weapons may be sold to liberals. All liberals must have a sign (small and tasteful to meet association rules) stating that they are a gun-free house. No liberal may hire private bodyguards. No one who does not meet these restrictions is allowed to campaign or contribute to any politician or initiative restricting availability of weapons to law-abiding citizens. |
| Posted by: Jackal 2004-3-19 9:24:41 PM |
| #10 Whoa! First time diver from Yemen is attempting a 3/4 roll with a 1 second tim... BOOM! |
| Posted by: Abu bin Diver 2004-3-19 2:38:10 PM |
| #9 "A gun control group filed a lawsuit Thursday accusing the Justice Department of aiding gun manufacturers in skirting assault weapons laws." If only that were true :( This suit should be thrown out just for their premise being untrue -- unfortunately ... |
| Posted by: Edward Yee 2004-3-19 1:09:29 PM |
| #8 One more argument for 'loser pays' tort reform... |
| Posted by: Raj 2004-3-19 1:04:04 PM |
| #7 This Brady bullshit is about as irritating as reformed smokers. The guy gets shot by some wacko and now he feels he should impose his beliefs on everybody else. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2004-3-19 12:54:37 PM |
| #6 Only if it is mated to a missle with enough range to to hit Greece. |
| Posted by: ed 2004-3-19 12:17:43 PM |
| #5 A few years back, the New Jersey legislature was doing its own "assault weapon" ban; CO2 air rifles fit their definition! And, yes, I think the Second Amendment is pretty open as to what an individual can keep around; but, since I don't think I could throw a nuke far enough to stay out of the blast area, I'd just as soon have my own M1A in the driveway. |
| Posted by: OldeForce 2004-3-19 12:08:26 PM |
| #4 "Any weapon the government has.....I should have one more powerful." Does that include nukes? |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-3-19 11:30:38 AM |
| #3 "Every one who knows the Texans, or who has heard of them, would naturally conclude that they never would submit to be disarmed. Any government that would attempt to disarm its people is despotic; and any people that would submit to it deserves to be slaves!" -- Historian H. Yoakum, 1855 |
| Posted by: gromky 2004-3-19 7:34:58 AM |
| #2 I forget who put this gem out and I'm to lazy to check snopes but it was " No matter what the problem is, the government is a bigger one". With Asshat's like the Brady Campaign grabbing the ear of every "progressive" Long Island whiner, I see their point. |
| Posted by: JerseyMike 2004-3-19 6:54:29 AM |
| #1 Read the Federalist Papers. James Madison, John Jay and Alexander Hamilton, put down on paper what the Constitution actually means. As far as firearms go.....the government is NEVER supposed to have the upper hand, over the people. PERIOD!! Any weapon the government has.....I should have one more powerful. And we DAMN SURE DO NOT DISARM, FOR ANY REASON.....PERIOD!! FROM MY COLD, DEAD HAND! Keep your powder dry, folks. It's just a matter of time.............. An armed American citizenry is what keeps the West free. If the American people EVER disarm.... America is finished, and the world will sink into a thousand years of darkness. "God grants liberty only to those who love it, and who are always ready to guard and defend it." Daniel Webster |
| Posted by: Texan 2004-3-19 2:47:27 AM |