Using Anti's tricks against them

Status
Not open for further replies.
4

.45Ruger

Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
338
Location
Phoenix Arizona
I think we all remember when the Protection of Lawful Commerce Act was kiled in the Senate when Swinetien, Chuckie Scummer and their likes filled the bill with unacceptable amendments. Why nor attach some great riders to Di Fi's AWB bill. I am thinking repeal the 86 ban on new machine guns, maybe national CCW under the Full Faith and credit clause. The bill could be make so Pro-gun as to make keeping the AWB completly impossible instead of just highly unlikely.
 
I've thought the same thing before. Even considered how to try and put things like repeal of the ban on new MG construction attached to something like, oh, I dont know, Hillary's 'great' healthcare reform crap. You run into a few problems, though. Well, maybe just one, but its a REALLY big one.

In order to do this sort of thing, you first need a CONgresscritter who's not only pro-gun, but also has the backbone to try something like this. Good luck finding one of those. Then, you need a bunch of others to get on board, so that the amendment, rider, whatever, is approved and attached to the bill in question.

Sorry but I dont think that you'll be seeing anything like this happen any time soon. Maybe not even within the lifetimes of any of the members here.
 
The country club checked pants RINO's lack too many body parts to do that.
They're missing spines and testicles.
 
Do you really think if we had a Senate that could pass an amendment to repeal the machine gun ban of 86 that they'd actually pass the new AWB in the first place!?!?
 
Why would the Republicans want to repeal the '86 ban on new machine guns? It was a Republican president that signed it into law, after all.
 
it takes forever just to get them to agree to tax me less and let me keep some more of my hard earned money...... and you want them to agree on letting me have machine guns now?
 
Why would the Republicans want to repeal the '86 ban on new machine guns? It was a Republican president that signed it into law, after all.
Click to expand...

Actually, the machinegun ban was a poison pill amendment meant to kill off the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act (which had been successfully killed every year for 7 years previous) that was added at the last minute by the Democrats. Instead we swallowed the pill and got both the protections and the MG ban.

Good history on it here:
http://www.hardylaw.net/FOPA.html
 
Thanks for the info, BR.

Welcome to The High Road, FeebMaster! :D
 
Actually, the machinegun ban was a poison pill amendment meant to kill off the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act (which had been successfully killed every year for 7 years previous) that was added at the last minute by the Democrats. Instead we swallowed the pill and got both the protections and the MG ban.
Click to expand...

Poison pill or not, it was passed by Congress and signed by a Republican president. Why would the Republicans now want to repeal some gun control they so happily passed in the '80s? Have they become more pro-gun since then? I certainly haven't seen any gun control get repealed since they took control of Congress and the Presidency.


Welcome to The High Road, FeebMaster!
Click to expand...

Thanks.
 
Why would the Republicans now want to repeal some gun control they so happily passed in the '80s?
Click to expand...

Read the link I provided you and it will explain that.

Have they become more pro-gun since then? I certainly haven't seen any gun control get repealed since they took control of Congress and the Presidency.
Click to expand...

Notice how ATF forbade any import of parts that could be used to build a semi-auto under Clinton (July 2000) and under Bush allowed importation of the same parts for repair or replacement (April 2001)?

As for "taking control of Congress", the Republicans have had a ONE seat advantage in the Senate for TWO whole years of Bush's four year term. That's about the same control you get driving your car with your feet. Despite that, they did pass the Tiarht Amendment protecting gun owner privacy by making destruction of NICS records on law-abiding gun owners immediate (versus 90-180 days under Clinton) and making things a bit easier for FFLs.
 
Poison pill or not, it was passed by Congress and signed by a Republican president.
Click to expand...

Please carefully reread Bartholomew's explanation. FOPA was a good thing. It was STILL a good thing, even with the BS the Dems were able to tack on.

Ol' Ronnie did the best he could for us on that one.
 
Please carefully reread Bartholomew's explanation. FOPA was a good thing. It was STILL a good thing, even with the BS the Dems were able to tack on.

Ol' Ronnie did the best he could for us on that one.
Click to expand...

I disagree. FOPA may have done some good, but it wasn't worth the machine gun ban.
 
FeebMaster:
So an out-of-control ATF, being required to sign for ammunition purchases in person (no mail-order allowed) and similiar BS is "acceptable" as long as you can get a cheap machine gun?

Where are you going to buy 5k of 9mm to shoot through your Uzi, are you willing to pay high per-box prices at your local gunstore to feed your fullauto toy?

I dont like the MG ban, but its a heck of a lot better than the BS from the GCA the FOPA eliminated. Nobody thought the MG ban would survive its first judicial review, as it was obviously unconstitutional; I believe the NRA's estimate was under 6 months until the ban was struck down.

Kharn
 
Kharn: So an out-of-control ATF, being required to sign for ammunition purchases in person (no mail-order allowed) and similiar BS is "acceptable" as long as you can get a cheap machine gun?

Where are you going to buy 5k of 9mm to shoot through your Uzi, are you willing to pay high per-box prices at your local gunstore to feed your fullauto toy?

I dont like the MG ban, but its a heck of a lot better than the BS from the GCA the FOPA eliminated. Nobody thought the MG ban would survive its first judicial review, as it was obviously unconstitutional; I believe the NRA's estimate was under 6 months until the ban was struck down.
Click to expand...

If ATF's behavior after FOPA qualifies as "in-control" I think I'd prefer them out-of-control.

My opposition to FOPA has nothing to do with getting a cheap machine gun for myself. Personally, I wouldn't touch the entire NFA process if it were free. I simply don't think FOPA was worth the price. Nobody thought the machine gun ban would survive and yet it's still with us today and it will probably be with us for a good long time yet. Who would have thought the NFA would last 70 years?
 
You might want to find the report from the Senate hearings on the ATF in the late 70's/early 80's before you say you'd prefer the pre-FOPA ATF. The modern-day ATF looks like choir boys in comparision.

Please read the Hardy link in Bartholomew Roberts' post near the top of this thread, its quite informative about all the changes the FOPA implemented.

Kharn
 
I disagree. FOPA may have done some good, but it wasn't worth the machine gun ban.
Click to expand...

Remember that just eight years later, they are going to pass a ban on semi-auto weapons that just look like machineguns. Think that they will allow NFA weapons to survive that?

FOPA looked like a tradeoff at the time; but it is likely we would still have gotten an MG ban and no protections at all if Reagan hadn't signed it.
 
Remember that just eight years later, they are going to pass a ban on semi-auto weapons that just look like machineguns. Think that they will allow NFA weapons to survive that?

FOPA looked like a tradeoff at the time; but it is likely we would still have gotten an MG ban and no protections at all if Reagan hadn't signed it.
Click to expand...

Why do you assume that a machine gun ban would have been included with the AWB or that it would have passed had it included the machine gun ban? It barely passed as it was even with the ten year sunset provision. Besides, having a ten year ban on new machine guns seems preferable to me than a permenant one.

If you want to apologise for Reagan's gun grabbing, be my guest, but don't try to blow off the things Reagan did by saying that someone in the future might have done them too.
 
You might want to find the report from the Senate hearings on the ATF in the late 70's/early 80's before you say you'd prefer the pre-FOPA ATF. The modern-day ATF looks like choir boys in comparision.

Please read the Hardy link in Bartholomew Roberts' post near the top of this thread, its quite informative about all the changes the FOPA implemented.
Click to expand...

I am aware of the changes FOPA made but I still don't think the machine gun ban was worth it.
 
If ATF's behavior after FOPA qualifies as "in-control" I think I'd prefer them out-of-control.
Click to expand...
No sir, you would not.

Reagan's anti-gun record as governor of California was known long before he became President. I put the primary blame for the MG ban on those most directly responsible: the smarmy New Jersey Democrat who attached it to the FOPA in an unusual parliamentary manuever (to be polite) and the dishonest House leadership that allowed it to pass on a rather dubious voice vote without debate.

By the way, welcome to THR and that's excellent work you do over there at DU. Please say hello to our mutual too, too funny friend for me. :D
 
Without FOPA '86, we wouldn't have inexpensive SKS's, Mosins, SAR's, etc. either, if I understand correctly.
 
No sir, you would not.

Reagan's anti-gun record as governor of California was known long before he became President. I put the primary blame for the MG ban on those most directly responsible: the smarmy New Jersey Democrat who attached it to the FOPA in an unusual parliamentary manuever (to be polite) and the dishonest House leadership that allowed it to pass on a rather dubious voice vote without debate.

By the way, welcome to THR and that's excellent work you do over there at DU. Please say hello to our mutual too, too funny friend for me.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the welcome.

I place the blame squarely on the president because he was most directly responsible. It's his job to veto bad bills and unconstitutional bills. Hughes may have introduced the amendment and he isn't without blame, but Reagan signed the bill into law. If he hadn't, there wouldn't be a ban on new machine guns.

If Bush renews the AWB will you blame Dianne Feinstein for introducing it or Bush for signing it?
 
FeebMaster:
Reagan almost vetoed the FOPA because of the MG ban, he signed it only after the NRA told him the ban could be easily defeated in court and that they still wanted it to become law.

Kharn
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Antis scored victories because we let them
Replies
10
Views
557
WvaBill
W
A
  • Locked
Kopel on anti-gun suits
Replies
9
Views
528
alan
A
D
  • Locked
New anti assault weapons proposals threaten citizens’ rights
Replies
5
Views
596
RavenVT100
R
C
  • Locked
Sen Tom Harkin (D-IA) response to my sunset the AWB email
Replies
13
Views
714
Antlurz
A
S
  • Locked
Too many misinterpretations - despite anti myths, the 2nd Amendment IS simple!
Replies
3
Views
507
shield20
S
Back
Top