Repeal the 86 ban?


PDA






Outlaws
October 19, 2006, 03:48 AM
You would have thought that with Republicans controlling both the House, Senate AND the White House, that the NRA would have attempted to get this repealed.

If you enjoyed reading about "Repeal the 86 ban?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Kenneth Lew
October 19, 2006, 04:02 AM
Thats a good one.

selector67
October 19, 2006, 04:04 AM
LOL, thats a good one, you had me going there for a minute.:neener:

Kenneth Lew
October 19, 2006, 04:09 AM
BTW, a lot of "NRA members only" ranges frown upon NFA items.

Outlaws
October 19, 2006, 04:21 AM
BTW, a lot of "NRA members only" ranges frown upon NFA items.

Now thats a good one. They should all have their NRA memberships revoked for treason.

swingset
October 19, 2006, 04:22 AM
Yeah, I'm with you. I can't believe a bunch of professional politicians weren't lining up to get labeled "Pro Assault Weapon", "Arming Criminals with Machine Guns", etc. Considering 95% of gun owners are Fudds, I can see the compelling push to do this.

Oh well, let's elect some Dems instead, they'll fight for our rights.

:o

DTakas
October 19, 2006, 04:48 AM
I am a member of an NRA only range and they are more than happy to welcome full autos. But I am aware that as a general rule the NRA does not want to be associated with NFA weapons.

I do think it is possible to have it repealed but extremely unlikely. A Supreme Court decision is probably the most likely way it would happen, but based on the Supreme Courtís track record for taking 2nd Amendment cases it's probably not going to happen there either.

SuperiorMarksman_18
October 19, 2006, 05:30 AM
I don't think the range I go to allows full autos. They don't even allow rapid fire for God's sake!

SuperiorMarksman_18
October 19, 2006, 05:30 AM
I don't think the range I go to allows full autos. They don't even allow rapid fire for God's sake!

Number 6
October 19, 2006, 07:05 AM
There is an assumption thrown around be a lot of people that if you control both houses of congress you can get any legislation through that you want. This just is not true. With any piece of legislation there are many hurdles that the legislation must go through for it to become law, and at many points along the way it can be held up by the minority. Having a majority does not equal having the ability to do as you please. The same logic applies to those who think if the republicans lose both houses there absolutely will be another AW ban. It could happen, but one does not equal the other without a lot of other things happening.

BobTheTomato
October 19, 2006, 07:37 AM
I can see the campaign ad now, "He voted to allow fully automatic weapons onto our streets!" Cue the picture of the mini gun dropping brass everywhere...... If the republicans rammed this through they would end up losing like the dems did after the assualt ban.

P0832177
October 19, 2006, 09:36 AM
There were some trade offs with the GCA of 86, that most of you probably take advantage of. IE mail order of reloading supplies and ammo!

I have no problem with ranges banning full auto fire, and the reason is the abilities of shooters them selves. Just cause you own a full auto does not mean you can shoot it safely!

Remember the greatest good for the greatest amount of people here applies. An open range is just that a range accessible by all shooters, not just a select few! I know that all one has to do is look at floor, walls, and ceiling of an indoor range or the target holders of an outdoor range to know that people can not hit the target! It is a crying shame to see how bad of shots some people are!

wdlsguy
October 19, 2006, 12:18 PM
But I am aware that as a general rule the NRA does not want to be associated with NFA weapons.
And until that changes I do not want to be associated with the NRA.

EShell
October 19, 2006, 12:27 PM
You would have thought that with Republicans controlling both the House, Senate AND the White House, that the NRA would have attempted to get this repealed.
Why would a Republican House, Senate and White House lead to repeal when a Republican White House signed the ban?

Look back at the federal firearms laws and please point me to one that **wasn't** signed by a Republican.

Republicans and Democrats . . . don't kid yourself, they're just two wings on the same bird.

As stated above, the NRA disassociates itself with certain types of firearms and shooters, it's how they stay popular with duck hunters.

Bartholomew Roberts
October 19, 2006, 12:34 PM
A. Rifle forum is the wrong place to post this. So I am moving it to L&P.

You would have thought that with Republicans controlling both the House, Senate AND the White House, that the NRA would have attempted to get this repealed.

Lincoln Chaffee is a Republican. Michael Bloomberg is a Republican. For that matter John Dingell is a Democrat. I would suggest that if you think that the reason the NRA doesn't bring up this issue is because while there may be a majority of Republicans, there aren't a majority of people who support a repeal of the 1986 ban and NRA doesn't want to lose the ones it does have in Congress by asking them to carry out a suicide charge that may get them unelected.

And until that changes I do not want to be associated with the NRA.

Why stop there? Why not refuse to vote in Congressional elections as well until they change to what you want? I am sure the technique will be just as successful.

Edited to add:
Sorry, this is a duplicate of a currently existing L&P thread and will be closed. The discussion can continue at the original thread here:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=222939

If you enjoyed reading about "Repeal the 86 ban?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!