Here We Go Again 1994 Redux

Agreed. And, mass media is helping to build sentiment against so-called “assault weapons”, too. For example, the attached article was published by Colorado’s largest news organization today. If you put yourself in the shoes of a naive non-gun owner who learns about these issues from the news, you’d absolutely get the impression that an AR-15 is some super-powered weapon, and quoting a doctor gives these claims a spark of legitimacy to most members of the public. Obviously they glossed over the idea of what a wound from a .30-06 or 7mm mag deer rifle might look like... they only alluded to the idea that the AR-15 is the ultimate killing machine with no place in society. These tactics were used in 1994, and they worked back then. We must not give an inch on our rights this time!

https://www.9news.com/mobile/articl...-body/73-ed87d7db-a4d8-4469-863a-e681e0532c22

As though the AWB of 1994 didn't teach them anything. It did NOTHING statistically and only increased the sales and prices of evrything and anything "tactical".

It's Unconstitutional whether it gets passed or not. Why are we going to put up with it? What good is the 2nd amendment if we just give in.

They go for the whole enchilada and then "settle" for something like Red Dawn, I mean "Flag" laws, or UBCs, or even the one thing I think they might get - raising purchase age for ALL firearms to 21. Then they point and loudly tell us how "reasonable" they are.

Most likely pass the full house. The Senate MAY be the dam that holds this garbage up ..MAY.

Mitch the Turtle is looking weak kneed right now, but Im hopeful he can't bully more than 10 other GOP members to sign on to anything...but there are still doubts.

Either way, this is a bunch of crap. Clearly, what happened in Texas was once again, a fine example of GOVERNMENT failures, more at the local level than federal this time, but still. The local PD dropped the ball in a big way, along with the school itself.

Yet, I'm supposed to feel ashamed because I like my 2nd Amendment rights, and I supposed to just give them up, in the name of "Doing Something" even after the clear cluster mess that Gov did.

If this passes, at some point we have to make a choice, Red Dawn, or passive non compliance Ghandi approach.

Everyone is aware, one if the measures bans not just sales of, but also transfer, and POSSESSION of 30 round magazines? While they are not demanding a ban of ARs and such...they get this you just know what's next.

For the love of God, blow up(figuratively speaking) your Reps and Senaters phone line. Let them know just how bad an idea this knee jerk move is.

Megawatt maker said:

Most likely pass the full house. The Senate MAY be the dam that holds this garbage up ..MAY.

Mitch the Turtle is looking weak kneed right now, but Im hopeful he can't bully more than 10 other GOP members to sign on to anything...but there are still doubts.

Either way, this is a bunch of crap. Clearly, what happened in Texas was once again, a fine example of GOVERNMENT failures, more at the local level than federal this time, but still. The local PD dropped the ball in a big way, along with the school itself.

Yet, I'm supposed to feel ashamed because I like my 2nd Amendment rights, and I supposed to just give them up, in the name of "Doing Something" even after the clear cluster mess that Gov did.

If this passes, at some point we have to make a choice, Red Dawn, or passive non compliance Ghandi approach.

Everyone is aware, one if the measures bans not just sales of, but also transfer, and POSSESSION of 30 round magazines? While they are not demanding a ban of ARs and such...they get this you just know what's next.

For the love of God, blow up(figuratively speaking) your Reps and Senaters phone line. Let them know just how bad an idea this knee jerk move is.

Click to expand...

Personally I think a good old fashion (good drink as well) letter is the best way. You spend the time to actually wright a letter, penmanship is a lost art, in hand and mail it to your reps. I think this goes farther then a call or email.

Point #1 - So politicians, who are protected by security details carrying semiautomatic firearms and high capacity magazines, want to take away my ability to own a semiautomatic firearm and high capacity magazines? Yep.

Point #2 - As I read the proposal, existing high capacity magazines will be grandfathered in. So exactly how will this new law reduce the prevalence of high (higher) capacity magazines?

Point #3 - Thankfully it appears they have insufficient votes in the Senate for this to pass. Bringing these proposals to a vote are nothing but "show votes" to be used during campaigning.

Plan2Live said:

Point #1 - So politicians, who are protected by security details carrying semiautomatic firearms and high capacity magazines, want to take away my ability to own a semiautomatic firearm and high capacity magazines? Yep.

Point #2 - As I read the proposal, existing high capacity magazines will be grandfathered in. So exactly how will this new law reduce the prevalence of high (higher) capacity magazines?

Point #3 - Thankfully it appears they have insufficient votes in the Senate for this to pass. Bringing these proposals to a vote are nothing but "show votes" to be used during campaigning.

Click to expand...

What happens in November again? Just how well is the current regime thought of?.....30% approval or there about. Just what can we do to find something to bring our base together?

Realistically, raising the age limit is the most that will happen. Forget a new AWB.

D.B. Cooper said:

I wonder why this never enters the discussion. The first thing I thought of when I saw the Canadian handgun ban was "Well, handguns are going to be extremely valuable now." The anti-gun forces have actually driven more guns into private ownership than if they were to just stay quiet.

Click to expand...

That's the ironic thing. How popular were AR's prior to 1994? How popular did AR's become post 2004?

Poper said:

As though the AWB of 1994 didn't teach them anything. It did NOTHING statistically and only increased the sales and prices of evrything and anything "tactical".

Click to expand...

You are dead wrong. The assault weapons ban of '94 taught them a bunch.

I will almost guarantee you that if they pass an assault weapons ban this time it won't have a sunset clause. It won't have a grandfather clause and I will just about bet you that they write the law so the workarounds to the '94 Ban like the thumb hole stock won't work this time

Remington1911 said:

Personally I think a good old fashion (good drink as well) letter is the best way. You spend the time to actually wright a letter, penmanship is a lost art, in hand and mail it to your reps. I think this goes farther then a call or email.

Click to expand...

You'd think but no. I don't remember who it was but there was a congressman who voted on a particular bill based on the number of yes letters he got in the number of no letters he got. And that's all he did was counted whether it was a yes or no and he went with the highest count.

And I he wasn't the one that was counting the letters

Night Rider said:

You are dead wrong. The assault weapons ban of '94 taught them a bunch.

I will almost guarantee you that if they pass an assault weapons ban this time it won't have a sunset clause. It won't have a grandfather clause and I will just about bet you that they write the law so the workarounds to the '94 band like the thumb hole stock won't work this time

Click to expand...

It will end up at the Supreme Court because it's Unconstitutional

I remember hearing in 1993 that the AWB wouldn't pass then either. Never give an inch. There is no sunset clause for this new one. It must be attacked with fervor.

Here are the two big parts of the bill in full text. First the magazine ban. This would ban new magazines over 10 rounds. It does include a grandfather clause.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/2510/text

The next is the safe storage law. I have always been opposed to these. If you have kids, lock up firearms when not being worn. It should never be mandated at any level.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/748/text?q={"search":["ethan's+law","ethan's","law"]}

Insignificant bill said:

It will end up at the Supreme Court because it's Unconstitutional

Click to expand...

The court is weak and borderline useless. I won't count on them to save our 2nd Amendment rights.

Insignificant bill said:

It will end up at the Supreme Court because it's Unconstitutional

Click to expand...

You mean like the first one did? Oh, wait.

Poper said:

As though the AWB of 1994 didn't teach them anything. It did NOTHING statistically and only increased the sales and prices of evrything and anything "tactical".

Click to expand...

Well that's why they pivot to the "enhanced" AWB proposal. The '94 ban had the grandfather provision allowing too many of these killing machines to be out in circulation and that is why there was no appreciable difference in gun violence. Or so they would have you think.

ETA: had nothing to do with the fact that criminals don't yield to laws and these restrictions don't mean a tinkers damn to a criminal or mass shooter. Drugs are heavily restricted and illegal too and well.....you know. I've grown up around some shady people, lots of kids I grew up around in my neighborhood and surrounding area turned into drug addicts and criminals, they regularly traffic in stolen firearms. It's just as easy to get a gun for a criminal as it is to get cocaine or marijuana.

These anti politicians just want to pivot away from the fact that we have alot of laws on the books already and they possess the prosecutorial power to make a dent in these types of crimes involving firearms but they refuse to use the tools already at their disposal because it will negatively impact their voting base so they'd just prefer to continue doing nothing about it and stick it to law abiding people instead.....

Night Rider said:

You'd think but no. I don't remember who it was but there was a congressman who voted on a particular bill based on the number of yes letters he got in the number of no letters he got. And that's all he did was counted whether it was a yes or no and he went with the highest count.

And I he wasn't the one that was counting the letters

Click to expand...

I would like to think don't judge all by the actions of one.

and in the end he can vote however he wants, however if he does not do what the people that elected him to do this is how our system works.

Night Rider said:

You are dead wrong. The assault weapons ban of '94 taught them a bunch.

I will almost guarantee you that if they pass an assault weapons ban this time it won't have a sunset clause. It won't have a grandfather clause and I will just about bet you that they write the law so the workarounds to the '94 Ban like the thumb hole stock won't work this time

Click to expand...

If such a law as you describe actually gets passed through congress, (which I sincerely doubt) I believe it will be declared unconstitutional by the first court that hears it and will be thrown out wholesale. Which is why the 1994 AWB was written the way it was.

Night Rider said:

You mean like the first one did? Oh, wait.

Click to expand...

The first one was before Heller and should have been ruled Unconstitutional as well.

Night Rider said:

You are dead wrong. The assault weapons ban of '94 taught them a bunch.

I will almost guarantee you that if they pass an assault weapons ban this time it won't have a sunset clause. It won't have a grandfather clause and I will just about bet you that they write the law so the workarounds to the '94 Ban like the thumb hole stock won't work this time

Click to expand...

I bought this exact rifle in 2002, just before the end of the AWB. No telestock, no flash hider, no bayonet lug. That's it. Same gun, just cosmetic features. How would this ban realistically affected anything one way or the other. The only intellectually honest answer is - it didn't make one iota of difference.