Why Pre-ban?


PDA






TechBrute
May 13, 2003, 06:58 PM
Just an informal poll. Why would you spend the extra $500+ to get a preban AR-15? Or would you?

If you enjoyed reading about "Why Pre-ban?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Hkmp5sd
May 13, 2003, 07:08 PM
I have a preban AR, but would not spend extra money to acquire one now. Haven't really developed a need for a bayonet lug and if forced to, can live without a flash suppressor.

I do have a sound suppressor for my AR, so if I didn't have a preban, I *might* consider paying the extra for the threaded barrel.

BusMaster007
May 13, 2003, 09:31 PM
If one really wanted to have the rifle with the 'right' features, as intended, sure, it would be worth it.

Pinned&Recessed
May 13, 2003, 09:59 PM
I personally have no use for a collapsing stock. But who is the Government to say what kind of rifle I can or cannot own?

Edited to Add: I voted for all of the above. But I clicked bayo lug and Flash Suppressor extra hard.

Jack19
May 14, 2003, 05:36 AM
I thought about buying a pre-ban AR recently, but decided against it.

If I want a short stock, I can use one of the "Entry" stocks now available. If I want to reduce flash, I can select ammunition accordingly. If I run out of ammo and have to go to blades, I think I've screwed up somewhere along the line...and ARs make really bad spears anyway.

Still Pinned&Recessed makes an excellent point. Who is the government to tell me what rifles, or their features are appropriate for me? It's not about guns, it's about control.

Minuteman
May 14, 2003, 11:53 AM
I voted for the last option. I wouldn't spend the extra money for a pre-ban. The only feature that I find really desireable is a flash suppressor, which I can get legally anyway on an M1A and a Daewoo DR200. Heck, you can have it on most post-ban rifles if you add a thumbhole stock. I don't advocate such requirements; I'm only saying that it's not worth the extra money. And hey, we might get lucky with the AWB's sunsetting.

Minuteman

MolonLabe416
May 14, 2003, 12:10 PM
Buy a post ban. Use the extra money to take a 3 day class from Randy Cain, Bill Jeans, Jim Crews, et. al. and learn to use it properly.

cratz2
May 14, 2003, 02:05 PM
When I had my Bushmaster, it had one of those non-collapsing collapsable stocks... that's all I had ever known. Never really thought it was uncomfortable until I shot a buddies AR that had the standard full-length stock. MUCH better! I guess it would be cool to have a short M4 or M4-gery with an actual collappsing stock but I have no use for the.

On the other hand, if the ban dies and you can put whatever on whatever, I will be getting a few collapsable stocks, just in case. :p

SkaerE
May 14, 2003, 02:32 PM
i like the collapsing stock, if only to make it easier to store (which is one of the reasons rifles have them anyhow, that and for jumping from planes) to be honest, an AR15 collapsing stock doesnt make the rifle all that much shorter. at least not compared to the many side or underfolders there are out there...
plus, it makes the rifle easier for smaller folks (generally women) to shoot. (its really just an adjustable length of pull)

anyhow, threaded barrels are nice because of all of the neat items than can be threaded onto them (ie, suppressors, golf ball launchers...you know, fun things)

my opinon of course...

TechBrute
May 14, 2003, 03:54 PM
It's my post, but I seem to have forgotten my $.02 worth. I have a preban Colt, and it has all of the above. However, I wouldn't spend the money for one if I didn't already have one because I don't need them. But like some wise previous poster said, it's not about guns, it's about control. Exactly why can't I have the features that are banned?

DMK
May 14, 2003, 04:04 PM
Personally, I think it's all a bunch of hype. It's not worth the insane prices.

The only thing pre-ban that I'm interested in is the mag capacity.

Hkmp5sd
May 14, 2003, 06:42 PM
The whole thing is pretty academic now. The Republican control Congress has stated they will let the ban expire next year. A replacement ban will not be submitted or voted on.

ShaiVong
May 14, 2003, 09:14 PM
Woohoo!:D :D

DMK
May 14, 2003, 09:30 PM
The whole thing is pretty academic now. The Republican control Congress has stated they will let the ban expire next year. A replacement ban will not be submitted or voted on. You're pretty confident in that?

Have you read this?

http://www.nraila.org/LegislativeUpdate.asp?FormMode=Detail&ID=644

Ian
May 14, 2003, 10:38 PM
I like my preban Daewoo for all three specific reasons, plus one that TechBrute left out. I use the folding stock on a regular basis for easier carrying and shipping. I haven't done any night shooting yet, but I am led to believe that the flash suppressor will be a very big help there. And I like the option of having a bayonet as an intermediate level of force for defensive scenarios. Plus, I'm planning on chopping up a crummy bayonet and making it into a quick-detach flashlight mount.

And my extra reason? It must really irk Feinstein, Schumer and Co to know that I, a mere citizen, own it. :neener:

ShaiVong
May 14, 2003, 11:11 PM
If a tree falls on Diane Fienstein in the woods, does anybody care?:fire:

BDM
May 15, 2003, 12:18 AM
if I didnt have a preban bushmaster I wouldnt spend the extra money and I have a post ban M4 bushy I got a KKF fake suppressor for the look and I use it as the plinking,training,test new parts beat on rifle shooting only wolf and I keep the preban at the 7000 round only good ammo mark and the post ban is working great.

Hkmp5sd
May 15, 2003, 06:25 AM
You're pretty confident in that?

Yep. Very sure. It was reported on FOX and ABC news and on several online newspapers. The republicans are not going to submit a new AW ban or allow a democratic ban to be voted on. Bush is not going to push the issue so he can play both sides in the next election. They stated even some democrats are going along with it in the hopes of making out better next year.

In fact, here's one:


Delay Sees Assault Weapon Ban Expiring in Congress
Tue May 13, 2:47 PM ET Add Politics to My Yahoo!

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives will not extend a 1994 assault weapons ban set to expire next year despite President Bush (news - web sites)'s call for its renewal, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said.

"The votes in the House are not there to reauthorize it," said DeLay, a Texas Republican and staunch foe of gun control.

The 1994 ban on military-style assault weapons expires in 2004 unless the U.S. Congress renews it. Bush, who generally opposes additional gun control legislation, has said he believes the ban should remain in effect.

A group of mostly Democratic senators last week opened a drive to get the extension passed in the U.S. Senate, and called on Bush to help.

They said they were optimistic it would clear the Senate but that it would need active help to win in the House, where pro-gun sentiments are stronger and Delay has considerable control over the agenda.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030513/pl_nm/congress_guns_dc_1

DMK
May 15, 2003, 08:47 AM
I sure hope you're right. But that almost seems too good to be true. It's not like politicians don't have a habit of turning around and stabbing us the the back at the last minute, even republicans.

Gotta watch the Senate too. It will be hard for them for sure, but I don't think it's time to pop a cold one and relax just yet.

Dave Markowitz
May 15, 2003, 09:29 AM
I, too, feel that it's likely that the AWB will sunset. However, I am not 100% certain. We should thank DeLay for his support but not get complacent. The Republicans have stabbed us in the back before. We should not let them forget what will happen to them if they do it to us on this issue.

444
May 15, 2003, 10:44 AM
I have three pre-bans, all of which I bought post-ban. One I bought for a reason you mention in the poll; I wanted to register it as an SBR and later add a suppressor.
I bought an SP1 for nostalgia sake; I owned one in the early eighties and just wanted one for old time sake.
I bought a Colt Lightweight Sporter in 9mm for a couple reasons. One is that it was considerably under market value. Another was that I wanted a 9mm AR and didn't want to have to tinker with it to make it run. So I bought one made to run from the factory with a pinned magwell adapter.

On the first two, I didn't pay anywhere near $500 over the cost of a post-ban although it was a couple hundred more. The 9mm was considerably more than I could have put one together for, but they are selling for much more than I paid for it.

Onslaught
May 15, 2003, 03:11 PM
I generally get VERY angry when I start reading responses to questions like these...

Nobody needs...

I don't see what anyone wants with....

There's no reason for you to have a....

Those are the same words that Frankenstein and Schumer use to start their sentences. :what:

But at least this time, a gentleman with only 37 posts here has stated what everyone has overlooked in previous versions. Thanks Pinned & Recessed.

I own 1 pre-ban Bushmaster AR. I bought it in late '93. I couldn't afford one now...

My flash supressor leaves less flash than my 2 buddies post-ban, WITHOUT having to "change ammo" from the cheap surplus I use.
My bayonet lug has no current use, but there are several functional attachments that make use of it, to mount flashlights, weaver rails, etc. if I so chose.
My telescoping stock is WONDERFUL, and my Wife and 11 yr old son can shoot it too.
You may think you're post-ban is all you need, but I can say that I have NEVER EVER EVER been shooting with MY pre-ban where there were others with post-bans who didn't come over to DROOL enviously over mine... some even ask "how much trouble could I REALLY get in if I put a telescoping stock on mine" :D

XxAR10xX
May 15, 2003, 03:58 PM
Why a preban? So you can pay more money out of the door to get "evil" features? Almost seems stupid to me considering the kind of premium that they charge for preban. Might as well save the money and get an ACOG or something that will improve the usability of the gun instead of just a collapsible stock.

<caveat - I could be all wrong because I live in CA and I am bitter that I had to buy a postban rifle, and now I can't have any more AR's period> :fire:

Onslaught
May 15, 2003, 05:12 PM
Why a preban? So you can pay more money out of the door to get "evil" features? Almost seems stupid to me considering the kind of premium that they charge for preban.
Exactly the kind of attitude that the drafters of the AWB were hoping we'd all take.

Rather than do something about it, a LOT of gun owners are calling other gun owners STUPID etc. because they paid more money for a weapon to have the features that God intended it to have, while they don't want to pay extra so they settle for a version that was designed to look like SOMEBODY ELSE said it oughta look!

NO, it's NOT "stupid" to buy a pre-ban, and it's ASHAME that so many are settling into the mindset of "I didn't need a flash supressor anyways, so I sure as heck ain't buying one, because it's STUPID to spend that extra money."

Then, on some skewed ABC poll, you'll read that "75% of gun owners feel that flash supressors and folding stocks are STUPID, and they don't want them anyway".

It's OK if you don't spend extra $$$ to buy a "pre-ban", but it's not "stupid" if you do. It's just ashame that it has to cost more, and that they're facing possible extinction.

I'd be willing to bet that NONE of you EVER walked into a gun dealer's place in 1992 and said "hey, do you sell any AR15's that don't have that stupid flash supressor thing?".

If the AW ban sunsets, how long afterward do you suppose those non-threaded, crowned barrels are gonna be manufactured?

Lets try and remember to point our "stupid" in the right direction, before you're all saying "Why in the world would I want to pay all that extra money for one of them "evil" banned Remington 7400 rifles, when I can buy 3 lever actions for the price of one of those things!

DON'T SETTLE!

:neener:

TechBrute
May 15, 2003, 05:39 PM
Very well said, thank you.

444
May 15, 2003, 06:06 PM
I guess you could make that argument, but what snaps me in threads like this is the typical attitude that the poster knows everything and can decide for the rest of us what is useful, what we need, what is stupid. Because what they have decided is the last word on the subject.

TechBrute
May 15, 2003, 06:37 PM
I guess you could make that argument, but what snaps me in threads like this is the typical attitude that the poster knows everything and can decide for the rest of us what is useful, what we need, what is stupid. Because what they have decided is the last word on the subject. The whole idea of this board is for people to state their opinions. Come to think of it, you didn't even address the subject at hand.

444
May 15, 2003, 06:57 PM
Actually, if you re-read the thread, I addressed the topic earlier.

Expressing your opinion would be something like: I personally have no use for a pre-ban rifle.

Pre-ban rifles are stupid is something else.

But hey, I am just expressing my opinion.

TechBrute
May 15, 2003, 07:47 PM
<as techbrute wanders off with foot in mouth>:banghead:

444
May 15, 2003, 08:00 PM
No really, I realize that my comment was kind of abrasive, but let's face it, there are various reasons why someone might choose to spend the premium for a pre-ban rifle. You can't just dismiss it out of hand.
Hey, for all we know, there are guys on here that have enough money that paying an extra thousand dollars for a rifle for no reason at all might not even give him cause for thought.
Keep an open mind, something that may seem stupid for your circumstances might be just the thing for someone else.

ShaiVong
May 15, 2003, 09:25 PM
I've spent several hundred dollars on steel plate armor, and a couple swords and maces... We have guns now, so am I stupid?:rolleyes:

Tell the guys over at the edged weapon forum :neener:

its all about what YOU want, not what somebody ELSE thinks you NEED. ;)

Byron Quick
May 15, 2003, 09:50 PM
Gotta watch the Senate too.

The Senate might pass it...so what if the House refuses?




its all about what YOU want, not what somebody ELSE thinks you NEED.

Exactly.

I own a preban HK91 and a selective fire Uzi. Paid preban prices for both, thank God.

Question? Will Bush I's executive order banning certain rifles be affected? Or will it still be in force?

Hkmp5sd
May 15, 2003, 10:27 PM
If the house doesn't pass it, the entire thing is dead. A bill has to be approved by both houses of congress before it can be submitted to the President for signature.

There isn't really an executive order banning certain rifles. Bush (41) directed ATF to re-evaluate certain rifles for the "sporting" uses. Any rifle ATF decided wasn't a sporting firearm was banned from importation. That is still in place. There is a way around it by using a given number of made in USA parts with a mixture of foriegn parts and assembling them in the US. ATF doesn't consider these as imports, so their totally legal.

DMK
May 16, 2003, 08:08 AM
If the house doesn't pass it, the entire thing is dead. A bill has to be approved by both houses of congress before it can be submitted to the President for signature. Who knows what's going to happen in a year, but if the Senate passes a bill and the President supports it as he said he would, that would leave the House Majority Leader holding up the whole works. God bless Tom DeLay for his stance so far, but that will be a lot of political pressure on him. He might soften and allow a House version of the Senate bill to see some daylight.

All I'm saying is we haven't won the war on the AWB yet. Heck, we haven't even won any battles yet. The only thing that's happened so far is lines are being drawn and sides are being chosen.

There isn't really an executive order banning certain rifles. Bush (41) directed ATF to re-evaluate certain rifles for the "sporting" uses. Any rifle ATF decided wasn't a sporting firearm was banned from importation. That is still in place. There is a way around it by using a given number of made in USA parts with a mixture of foriegn parts and assembling them in the US. ATF doesn't consider these as imports, so their totally legal. That's a great point! I keep seeing folks who think that when the AWB sunsets, we will have the glory days back with AK, SKS and HKs galore. Imports will still be banned. We will only see changes in U.S. made arms and magazine capacities.

Onslaught
May 16, 2003, 09:05 AM
I've spent several hundred dollars on steel plate armor, and a couple swords and maces... We have guns now, so am I stupid?
Depends... Is that a pre-ban mace with the spikes on it, or a post-ban mace with the rubber balls?

:D

I guess you could make that argument, but what snaps me in threads like this is the typical attitude that the poster knows everything and can decide for the rest of us what is useful, what we need, what is stupid.
Or put another way:
If we were all just alike, you wouldn't have anybody to flip off in traffic! :what:
That is my other arguement, but I had to choose between to pet peeves ;)

I call it the "Bill Ruger" statement of false omnipotence... for obvious reasons :cuss:

Steve Smith
May 16, 2003, 09:46 AM
Riflemen are definitely some of the more "sane" (if I may) and I appreciate you guys taking care of yourselves in this thread. Especially since this is the first time I've looked at it in a long while.

444
May 16, 2003, 11:56 AM
Steve:
We all enjoy and respect one another, and value each other's opinions. But, I for one can't resist a good argument, although I make an effort to try to keep it civil, although I dont' always succed. :uhoh:

<SLV>
February 27, 2008, 02:30 PM
Are there any differences between pre-ban ARs and those available today ("post ban end")?

Urbana John
February 27, 2008, 02:51 PM
<SLV> Where and WHY did you dig this thread up????

The last post before yours is 5/16/2003!!!!!

I wondered "***" before I noticed the dates!!!

Carry on----I don't really know the answer (s) to your question

UJ

deercop
February 27, 2008, 03:06 PM
No differences that I'm aware of. Aside from a serial number search to determine date of manufacture, if the model hasn't changed, I don't know how you would tell a 1993 gun from a 2008 gun.

That doesn't seem to stop some dealers from trying to recoup some of their investment by hawking the fact they're "pre-ban". Unless of course you live in certain state, and the only fun guns you can have are preban.

highorder
February 27, 2008, 03:32 PM
the ban is gone, as is any discussion about evil features with it. (unless you live in a ban state; I dont know where they are, buy Ohio isn't one of them.

Dobe
February 27, 2008, 05:17 PM
That was scarey. I thought "Did I miss the election?" "I haven't finished stocking up on mags". "I have another AR to buy."

I'm back in Kansas now. Life is much better.....for now.

cracked butt
February 27, 2008, 06:25 PM
Isn't kind of weird that only a few years ago the things on the poll list were considered expensive accessories to buy a pre-ban gun for instead of standard features on nearly every rifle sold today?

hoji
February 27, 2008, 06:40 PM
WOW:what: Who pulled the stake out of this one ? And why?:)

TexasRifleman
February 27, 2008, 07:13 PM
Who pulled the stake out of this one ?

Man no kidding..... ZOMBIE THREAD!!!!!!

But it's kinda funny to read back now and see how we were then. That ban sunset felt like it was never gonna get here didn't it?

Can't let them do that sh*t again.......

gaweidert
February 27, 2008, 08:28 PM
Some of us live in states where pre ban and post ban still mean something.

Mot45acp
February 27, 2008, 10:20 PM
I dont get it.

If the resurrecting poster would have posted this as a new thread everyone would get on him/her for not using the search function.

Eightball
February 27, 2008, 11:54 PM
I was scared crapless for a second, then noticed "hmm, this is a ZOMBIE!"

What calibre for zombie threads? I'm thinking something in the ".MOD" range....

GBExpat
February 28, 2008, 12:04 AM
Just an informal poll. Why would you spend the extra $500+ to get a preban AR-15? Or would you?

I would not.

sanglant
February 28, 2008, 07:05 AM
when zombie threads attack, news at 11:00 :D

rbernie
February 28, 2008, 08:46 AM
Are there any differences between pre-ban ARs and those available today ("post ban end")?For most folk, no. Some states still have partial bans in place at the state level (only the Federal AWB sunsetted in fall of 2004) and therefore they still have to play the 'pre-ban/post-ban' game.

Firepower!
February 28, 2008, 10:44 AM
Well since you are in the US, and as I understand from the conversations- only preban option that would attract me to spend more $$$ would be select fire if possible.

Cannonball888
February 28, 2008, 10:56 AM
I bought an SP1 less than 6 months ago for $900.

Reasons:
1. Great deal
2. Nostalgia
3. Investment

Chipperman
February 28, 2008, 12:44 PM
I bought an SP1 less than 6 months ago for $900.

Wow, that's a really good price!

peck1234
February 28, 2008, 11:03 PM
Wondering if anyone here can please post a picture of there "pinned stock" I just bought my new AR (DPMS) and it should be coming in within the next month. So what does the pin look like and where is it? Is it easily removbable?

SoCalShooter
February 28, 2008, 11:26 PM
I like the bayonet lug, cause every good weapon deserves a pointy edged sharp piece of metal protruding conspicuously from underneath the muzzle.

skinewmexico
February 29, 2008, 12:45 AM
The only reason pre-bans are still discussed is the collectors are trying to prop up the market for guns they paid too much for, that didn't stay unique or collectible.

Oh crap. Sucked into a zombie thread without checking dates.

45Badger
February 29, 2008, 01:04 AM
I picked up a pre-ban Colt, and probably paid a small premium for it.

I figure it's cheap insurance against a possible move to a state where it matters. And it shoots like crazy!

Regolith
February 29, 2008, 01:56 AM
Holy crap, this thread threw me through a loop there for a second, trying to figure out why anyone cared about pre-bans anymore... For a minute there, I figured that the OP must live in a state that still ban's em, but then when I saw that he was Texas I got suspicious and checked the date...

JNewell
February 29, 2008, 07:34 PM
Omigosh :eek:, what is this thread doing out of the ground? It's five years old...the ban is gone, at least until January...

avmech
February 29, 2008, 08:08 PM
Got me too :banghead:

I got a R6601 at the beginning of the ban............I can sell it today for what I paid, if not more, so no $$ lost :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Why Pre-ban?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!