If the AWB is renewed, how will you vote?

Will you vote for Bush if an "Assault Weapons" ban renewal is signed?

  • I'll vote against Bush

    Votes: 75 54.7%

  • I'l reluctantly vote against Bush

    Votes: 17 12.4%

  • I'l reluctantly vote for Bush

    Votes: 32 23.4%

  • I'll vote for Bush

    Votes: 13 9.5%
  • Total voters
    137
Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2003/Oct-06-Mon-2003/opinion/22298965.html

Closest I could find refering to it. As you can see, it was quite a few months ago. Good luck finding the article on the CDC site, I've been trying, but their search engine it terrible. If I do run across it, I'll be sure to let you have it... BTW, what about my scholarly journal offer? It has proof on how little AWs were used in crimes, yet you seem to dismiss it...

Listen, rifles can still be bought and always will be. Relax.
Click to expand...

But can we afford them?
 
Rook, the Las Vegas Review Journal? The CDC? Scraping the bottom of the barrel?
 
In 1994 I was 20 years old and already owned 2 AR type rifles. I was not busy smoking dope, I was in fact serving my country as a United States Marine and upholding my oath to support and defend the US Constitution. You have claimed to be a Marine in the past and I have no reason to disbelieve you, but I do have to wonder if you took a different oath as you do not seem to mind trampling over what is arguably the most important part of that document.

If you have a desire to answer my questions just scroll back up to my posts and look for groups of words that end with the symbol that looks like this: ?

I tried to link to the post but apparently failed.

Shouldn't be too hard to find as I have repeated them several times. I'll even make it easy and summarize the "stupid thing about a colapsible stock" here:

You said...

CHL , you taking up fix's slack? I don't have to provide proof , the bill is in place, the ENTIRE LEO supports it, you prove otherwise. Rational , historical ? Almost ALL ammendments is a direct reflection of issues that swept the land and were delt with and this is just another real issue that needs to be dealt with, get over it. We're at war , you either get behind it or get run over.
Click to expand...

...and I'd just like to know how a collapsable stock attached to my personal rifle impairs the war effort in any way shape or form.
 
Fix , for Heavens sake, a collapsible stock has NOTHING to do with anything , so why do you keep bringing it up? The ban covers any semi auto rifle with a detachable magazine and TWO of the following: pistol grip, threaded barrel, bayonet lug, folding/collaspible stock, so what in the hecK is your point?
 
You are aware that you are on a discussion board full of people who are very well versed in the details of this and other anti-gun legislation right? You seem to be going out of you way to "educate the professors" as it were. I am fully aware of how my senators voted with respect to this and other anti-gun legislation as are most other members here. What I am unaware of is exactly how my possesion of a rifle with a collapsing stock would impair the war effort. You appear to be well versed in that subject matter and I am appealing to you for your help.
 
The ban covers any semi auto rifle with a detachable magazine and TWO of the following: pistol grip, threaded barrel, bayonet lug, folding/collaspible stock, so what in the hecK is your point?
Click to expand...

His point, is he can't put one on any semi-auto rifle made with a pistol grip since it already has one 'evil' feature, banned by the AWB you are supporting. What's your point?

An example of the idiocy of this law: Take a 10/22, attach a pistol grip target stock and thread the barrel for a compensator. You have just become a member of Club Fed.

What exactly are you debating in this thread GeneC? I think your arguments have reach the point of incomprehension. You have provided nothing more than Brady/VPC/HCI rehtoric, which is based on numbers provided by many government agencies including the CDC. When I show you numerous news articles refering to a CDC report stating that firearm laws cannot be deemed effective, you don't even reply.

Both my senators voted NAY, thank you very much. :)
 
Really, give it up guys, GeneC is just messing with you. He's actually a member of GOA and JPFO, and understands that after evil guns are banned, its a slippery slope to full on confiscation.

thinkagain_s.jpg

Unless of course he actually does support elitist victim disarmament. In which case maybe http://www.millionmommarch.org/ would be more his style.

atek3
 
Rook said: "His point, is he can't put one on any semi-auto rifle made with a pistol grip since it already has one 'evil' feature, banned by the AWB you are supporting. What's your point?"


One of my points are that some people will get on here and post without a clue what's going on. That is NOT his point and I do NOT support AWB, I support my Congress and my President. I have faith they'll do the right thing and I don't buy into this doomsday naysayers' rhetoric that this will lead to full confiscation. The AWB of the 30s didn't lead to full confiscation, nor did the weapons ban of '68 , nor did the ban of '86. Klinton/Reno had TWO terms to do so and they really DID want to, but this is as close as they got and the reason we're dealing with this now is 'cause half this Country is off it's rocker and keeps voting in Socialists. That man up there in the White House is doing a HECK of a job, dealing with real issues daily and dealing with all sides and still getting things done. Noone here seems to appreciate how hard that is. There's been Presidents who were hard headed and vetoed everything that came across his desk if there was ONE thing on it he didn't like. He alienated Congress and spent the rest of his term in gridlock and got ZIP accomplished. We are at war at WW proportions, but I don't see any loyalty to the cause here. These'd be the same people that in WWII would be whining and complaining 'cause there was rationing. Fix , to answer your question, you wanting to break whatever rules that were put in place by this Govt at this time for the greater good, means X amt of resources'd have to stop what they're doing and check you out, possibly letting a real terrorist slip by. Why take that chance? Seems to me if you really want to put a collapsable stock on your rifle, you'd just go ahead and do it and noone'd ever know, but you seem to want to flaunt it or something. Just get over it.

ATEK3, you said goodbye, what're you doing back? Btw, hundreds and thousands of kids are being killed on the streets yearly, what's your solution? Do you think you have a better idea or solution than LEO, who says it'll help if all the mac-10s and tec-9s and such'd get off the streets. Maybe you want to help the gangs out and make it easier for them to get guns. Maybe you want to sell them to them yourself. IMO, we have to trust our Govt and our agencies that we hire to serve us and pay heed to their recommendations to help them do their job. Not everything is a political conspiracy.
 
GeneC, it's wonderful for the President and the Congress that you so rely on their good judgement. But I see a problem with your views and their reasoning:

The AW Ban is all about cosmetics rather than function or crime.

The same basic guns are being sold. The post-ban guns function the same as the pre-ban guns. The gun goes bang and self-loads the next round. What useful, anti-crime purpose has been served?

What is the anti-crime utility?

If the alleged purpose is to reduce crime, how are we better served by the ban when for all practical purposes no crime is prevented? (Okay, no more drive-by bayonettings...)

I guess what perturbs me is the passage of a law which has cost the public so much money yet achieved no noticeable result. That is, in spite of FBI/ATF testimony before Congress that EBRs were used in some 1% or 2% of all crimes involving firearms, the ban passed. The costs result from the higher prices for parts and pieces in the world of pre-ban guns, and the costs of enforcement of a non-utile law.

How is there wisdom in wasting tax money inenforcement of a nonefficacious law, and in raising the cost of purchases to the public?

I'm afraid your faith is rather seriously misplaced.

Art
 
Link? Nope. C-Span coverage of the hearings; press coverage/commentary. Memory--I ain't senile, yet.

Given the relatively low percentage of all crime gun usages on the part of the "assault weapons" (regardless of testimony, some things are reasonably seen as common knowledge just from police "take-aways" of criminals' firearms), it is not physically possible for there to be any correlation between the ban and the dramatic reduction in violent crime.

Other factors enter: Longer incarcerations rates, for one. Another is the demographics by age; fewer young people between 18 and 24. (This demographic group, however, is increasing--and so crime rates are expected to rise.)

Art
 
Badnarik gets my vote whether or not Bush vetoes AWB. Out here in California the Democrat candidate is bound to win in any case. The only way I can (possibly, hopefully, maybe??) send a message with my vote is to vote for a third party candidate. Contacting elected officials and their party flacks - Democrat or Republican - generates only form letter replies.
 
I figured as much a response, which shows the folly of this discussion. First everyone wants facts, but when they're produced , they refuse to accept them. Of course other factors enter, but that factors in too.

cuch, are you suggesting that there isn't?
 
ATEK3, you said goodbye, what're you doing back?
Click to expand...

I know, I'm sorry, but when the F-meter spikes I have to come back...it's a THR compulsion. (The F-meter is my fascist smackto detector.)

atek3
 
ART said: "Other factors enter: Longer incarcerations rates, for one. Another is the demographics by age; fewer young people between 18 and 24. (This demographic group, however, is increasing--and so crime rates are expected to rise.)
"



http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/12000.html



Hmmm, Art, according to US Census statistics, teens below 18 have grown 25%. In fact, pop has increased across the board.


Btw, the 'other factors' are a result of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act(yes Cuch).
 
Seems to me if you really want to put a collapsable stock on your rifle, you'd just go ahead and do it and noone'd ever know, but you seem to want to flaunt it or something. Just get over it.
Click to expand...

No. I just don't want to get pulled over say for a speeding ticket, the officer see my collapsible stock, and I instantly go to prison. Which is what the penalty is for violation the AWB. After that, I wouldn't even be able to own firearms anymore. I'm also glad you encourage breaking the law.

Do you think you have a better idea or solution than LEO, who says it'll help if all the mac-10s and tec-9s and such'd get off the streets.
Click to expand...

I already told you, AW are used in around 2% of crime annually. Last I checked, criminals perferred handguns along the lines of Bryco and Ravens. Who's the one distorting the facts here? Every AW sold does not automatically go to the streets. That's just some Brady/VPC/HCI lie.

I figured as much a response, which shows the folly of this discussion. First everyone wants facts, but when they're produced , they refuse to accept them. Of course other factors enter, but that factors in too.
Click to expand...

Your Brady link you originally posted wasn't fact. They have proved to lie time and time again. I have provided links to those articles quouting the CDC findings, including one by the Washington Times. I've also constantly offered you a journal article with references you can gladly look up, but you have yet to except my offer. You my friend, are one of the many daft people we have for gun owners, or most anything else in the US; you don't care what they ban/restrict, so long as it doesn't effect you.

Also, the NFA, a good idea at the time, then turned into the complete ban of full-autos after the '86 law. Shows how one law can be turned around and used against us and why no one likes registration. It has been used too many times, even in modern day CA/NY to confiscate their populations firearms. When some people are hell bent on tottally banning firearms, you need people like us that will be their to fight them. Otherwise they'll chew the rights away peice by peice. What are you going to do when they ban hunting rifles because they penetrate kevlar vests? Ted Kennedy is currently trying and you can bet his friend in Senate are helping. You can't always trust the government to do what is right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
MMM Strategy for AWB Renewal
Replies
21
Views
1K
Justin
Justin
S
  • Locked
AWB Renewal and Marriage Amendment
Replies
13
Views
774
Ransom
R
L
  • Locked
Two Petitions to not renew the AWB
Replies
0
Views
621
LoveMy45
L
T
  • Locked
  • Poll
AWB Sunset vote.
Replies
14
Views
2K
Grey54956
G
B
  • Locked
  • Poll
If Bush allows renewal of AWB...
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Schuey2002
S
Back
Top