And so it starts ... HR 1022 ... to Reauthorize Fed AW Ban
- Thread starter 30 cal slob
- Start date
- Status
Nightcrawler
Member
So, you get to keep your old "assault rifles", but you can't ever sell it or buy a "pre-ban", neh?
Awesome. Just awesome.
Awesome. Just awesome.
scurtis_34471
Member
I guess I'd better buy my guns now before this idiotic bill gets passed.
scurtis_34471
Member
Let's pile on this poll!
Here is a poll being taken on this bill: http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1022.html
Here is a poll being taken on this bill: http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1022.html
Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.
Any part, eh? So no replacement springs/pins/etc.. if something breaks then? And does this mean Home Depot or what have you will be in "constructive possession" of an "assault weapon" if they sell roll pins or rivets one might use to assemble something if they were made after the bill passes? Or, as per that, and Section 6 ("REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECKS..."), would one need to fill out a 4473 at a hardware store to buy a "grandfathered" widget which could ostensibly be used in building an "assault weapon?"
Something tells me she didn't think her cunning plan all the way through.
Any part, eh? So no replacement springs/pins/etc.. if something breaks then? And does this mean Home Depot or what have you will be in "constructive possession" of an "assault weapon" if they sell roll pins or rivets one might use to assemble something if they were made after the bill passes? Or, as per that, and Section 6 ("REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECKS..."), would one need to fill out a 4473 at a hardware store to buy a "grandfathered" widget which could ostensibly be used in building an "assault weapon?"
Something tells me she didn't think her cunning plan all the way through.
nobody_special
member
I don't think something from Home Depot would be "designed or intended for use in converting a firearm..."
I'm having a little trouble parsing all this precisely, as it's just a patch on existing law and not complete in and of itself. However, this appears to be a fairly comprehensive ban on semi-automatic rifles... especially if you consider the section which bans any rifle or shotgun designed for military or LE use. This is evil. It'd be easy to argue that any autoloading rifle is designed for military or LE use.
I think you could buy or sell a pre-ban, but you'd have to go through a dealer.
I'm having a little trouble parsing all this precisely, as it's just a patch on existing law and not complete in and of itself. However, this appears to be a fairly comprehensive ban on semi-automatic rifles... especially if you consider the section which bans any rifle or shotgun designed for military or LE use. This is evil. It'd be easy to argue that any autoloading rifle is designed for military or LE use.
I think you could buy or sell a pre-ban, but you'd have to go through a dealer.
Autolycus
Member
This is just getting worse and worse.
Mods can we sticky this thread as it will affect us all.
Mods can we sticky this thread as it will affect us all.
Thin Black Line
Member
LOL, my vote just put us another percentage point against it....
In any case, no post-ban-with-a-pistol-grip wiggle room, huh?
cosine
Member
My rep (Sensenbrenner) is on the committee. He's pretty good on firearms, issues, but I sent him an email anyway to remind him.
PILMAN
Member
Gah this happens right before I'm about to purchase a galil receiver as well, damnit..
George S.
Member
I had read about this bill on another forum and it included a link to some information about her and her record in the House.
It seems that during her career, she introduced 89 bills that had no other sponsors. Of those 89, 86 never got out of committee. Of the three that moved out of committee, none ever became law. This particular bill has no co-sponsors.
Based on her track record, the people who voted her into office are not really getting their money's worth.
I don't really think that the House is ready right now to address gun control as a major priority issue. There is too much going on with Iraq and assorted other issues. The Dims are in the process of trying to figure out how to effectively control the House as some Dims are conservative enough to side with Republicans on certain votes. Until the House (and the Seante) figures out a way to rule completely with their new powers, it may not be until the next session of Congress before serious anti-gun legislation hits the floor and votes are taken.
It seems that during her career, she introduced 89 bills that had no other sponsors. Of those 89, 86 never got out of committee. Of the three that moved out of committee, none ever became law. This particular bill has no co-sponsors.
Based on her track record, the people who voted her into office are not really getting their money's worth.
I don't really think that the House is ready right now to address gun control as a major priority issue. There is too much going on with Iraq and assorted other issues. The Dims are in the process of trying to figure out how to effectively control the House as some Dims are conservative enough to side with Republicans on certain votes. Until the House (and the Seante) figures out a way to rule completely with their new powers, it may not be until the next session of Congress before serious anti-gun legislation hits the floor and votes are taken.
scurtis_34471
Member
This pushed me to act now. I was going to hold off on buying more guns until later this year, but later this year may no longer be viable. I just ordered a 7.62x39 VEPR II with a wood thumbhole stock and 2 30-round steel mags. My wife was not thrilled with my dropping $750 right now, but I told her it might be the last chance I get to buy a semi-auto rife other than a .22.
I've already decided that my next two handguns are going to be an XD 45 and a Walther P99 AS 9mm. I can't buy the guns yet, but I may stock up on high capacity mags while I can still get them.
I've already decided that my next two handguns are going to be an XD 45 and a Walther P99 AS 9mm. I can't buy the guns yet, but I may stock up on high capacity mags while I can still get them.
Contact your Representatives and be on the lookout for a Senate companion bill. Contact your Senators, anyway, and tell them that you oppose any proposed legislation regarding a new AWB.
Also, forgive me if I missed it in the text, but is there a ban on mouse guns (AKA "Saturday Night Specials")? Damn, I need to go on a buying spree in case the wackos enact this one. So sales of currently legally possessed "assault weapons" would be banned?
Also, forgive me if I missed it in the text, but is there a ban on mouse guns (AKA "Saturday Night Specials")? Damn, I need to go on a buying spree in case the wackos enact this one. So sales of currently legally possessed "assault weapons" would be banned?
PILMAN
Member
If I am building a gun, should the receiver be top priority or the parts kit?
ctdonath
Member
Once again, the gun crowd starts getting wrapped up in details. Discussions of "what does this phrase mean" and "I'm gettin' mine now" and "how can we sort of get around this part" all avoids the core issue:
We've seen the likes of this before, this one is worse, make absolutely sure this doesn't pass.
May I suggest a parallel tactic:
Overturn 922(o) (the '86 ban on new machineguns).
All the AWB II verbiage means nothing when a gun can go full-auto ... and the only thing stopping you having one is a single sentence in law.
You have a Constitutional right to buy a new M4 - not just an M4gery, which the Left wants to take from you also by piecemeal, but a right to keep and bear exactly what a standard modern soldier owns.
NFA items were not subject to the old AWB, and would not be subject to AWB II. HR1022 gets wound around individual harmless parts; why get wrapped up in those details when we can get it all plus select-fire?
Choose the battle; do not let the enemy choose it for you.
Fight for what you want, don't just fight to maintain the status quo.
We've seen the likes of this before, this one is worse, make absolutely sure this doesn't pass.
May I suggest a parallel tactic:
Overturn 922(o) (the '86 ban on new machineguns).
All the AWB II verbiage means nothing when a gun can go full-auto ... and the only thing stopping you having one is a single sentence in law.
You have a Constitutional right to buy a new M4 - not just an M4gery, which the Left wants to take from you also by piecemeal, but a right to keep and bear exactly what a standard modern soldier owns.
NFA items were not subject to the old AWB, and would not be subject to AWB II. HR1022 gets wound around individual harmless parts; why get wrapped up in those details when we can get it all plus select-fire?
Choose the battle; do not let the enemy choose it for you.
Fight for what you want, don't just fight to maintain the status quo.
Still 2 Many Choices!?
Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2006
- Messages
- 455
Beautiful ctdonath, just beautiful...
Slip a repeal of 922o, into the bill and I would gladly give up my M4gery and AK, for ones with the happy switch . The antis would probably get so googly eyed over it passing they wouldn't even notice they were authorizing new production MG to the public 
!!!!
Slip a repeal of 922o, into the bill and I would gladly give up my M4gery and AK, for ones with the happy switch
. The antis would probably get so googly eyed over it passing they wouldn't even notice they were authorizing new production MG to the public !!!!p8riot
Member
Since the receiver is probably serialized, I'd suggest that you get it while you still can. Parts kits typically don't require FFL involvement.
SoCalShooter
Member
If this were the deciding factor in the AWB ban bill then we would have won by a landslide.
Oops, yea, don't mind me. I was half asleep when I posted, and read the second bit as a "combination of any parts" instead of "any combination of parts," thus it seemed rather vague. But then again, the ATF once ruled that a shoestring is a machine gun, so you never know.nobody_special said:
Thin Black Line
Member
Let's make this scenario more interesting:
http://www.examiner.com/a-573127~Some_mull_idea_of_Sen__Bill_Clinton.html
Are you scare yet? You should be!
http://www.examiner.com/a-573127~Some_mull_idea_of_Sen__Bill_Clinton.html
Are you scare yet? You should be!
(not sure what happened to my THR account, had to create a new one...)
Let me interject something here, which I don't think has been brought up.
I know a lot of you are writing to your Senators and Congressmen about this AWB bill. And it's commendable that you do so, as I also don't believe in any gun restrictions even going back to the NFA. This next go-around for President in '08, I will probably vote for the Constitution Party, for the first time not voting for the Republican party.
As most of you know, the Liberal Democrats are all about C-O-N-T-R-O-L. They stay in power by controlling what people can and cannot do. Their ultimate goal is probably that people no longer think for themselves, and government does all the thinking for you. This should be of no surprise to any of you, as Liberal Democrats are more Socialist leaning on the political scale.
With that said, consider the AWB and what Thomas Jefferson wrote, "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." The tyrants who our country's founding fathers referred to was the Gov't who we had just rebelled against and the Gov't which was soon to be put in place.
The Assault Weapons Ban bill has nothing to do about public safety.
Let me say it again, as there's over 5 pages here discussing public safety, AR-15 rifles, high-cap magazines, and this HR 1022 bill.
The Assault Weapons Ban bill has nothing to do about public safety. It has everything to do with the Liberal Democrats in Gov't wanting to maintain (here's that word again) control over the population. With such "assault" weapons in the hands of civilians, we are on equal footing with the police. In the minds of Liberal Democrats, the law enforcement arm of Gov't cannot be on equal footing with it's citizens if it wants to continue to maintain control.
The Gov't is afraid of people like you and I having weapons which put us on equal footing with them (and their law enforcement arm, the police).
The Assault Weapons Ban bill has nothing to do with public safety, it has everything to do with Gov't maintaining control over the citizens.
Writing to your Senators and Congressmen is a noble cause. I support your efforts. However, I think that at the same time as you write your letters and voice your displeasure, you should also be ordering more high-cap magazines, more packs of ammo, and even more AR and AK weapons.
I am not going to bring up the big "R" word, there's no need for it. But I just want to simply state the obvious of why Liberal Democrats are in favor of the AWB, gun registration, and other gun control laws, and to remind you what our country's founding fathers felt about the gov't and our duties and responsibility to our country as American citizens to keep gov't in check.
Let me interject something here, which I don't think has been brought up.
I know a lot of you are writing to your Senators and Congressmen about this AWB bill. And it's commendable that you do so, as I also don't believe in any gun restrictions even going back to the NFA. This next go-around for President in '08, I will probably vote for the Constitution Party, for the first time not voting for the Republican party.
As most of you know, the Liberal Democrats are all about C-O-N-T-R-O-L. They stay in power by controlling what people can and cannot do. Their ultimate goal is probably that people no longer think for themselves, and government does all the thinking for you. This should be of no surprise to any of you, as Liberal Democrats are more Socialist leaning on the political scale.
With that said, consider the AWB and what Thomas Jefferson wrote, "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." The tyrants who our country's founding fathers referred to was the Gov't who we had just rebelled against and the Gov't which was soon to be put in place.
The Assault Weapons Ban bill has nothing to do about public safety.
Let me say it again, as there's over 5 pages here discussing public safety, AR-15 rifles, high-cap magazines, and this HR 1022 bill.
The Assault Weapons Ban bill has nothing to do about public safety. It has everything to do with the Liberal Democrats in Gov't wanting to maintain (here's that word again) control over the population. With such "assault" weapons in the hands of civilians, we are on equal footing with the police. In the minds of Liberal Democrats, the law enforcement arm of Gov't cannot be on equal footing with it's citizens if it wants to continue to maintain control.
The Gov't is afraid of people like you and I having weapons which put us on equal footing with them (and their law enforcement arm, the police).
The Assault Weapons Ban bill has nothing to do with public safety, it has everything to do with Gov't maintaining control over the citizens.
Writing to your Senators and Congressmen is a noble cause. I support your efforts. However, I think that at the same time as you write your letters and voice your displeasure, you should also be ordering more high-cap magazines, more packs of ammo, and even more AR and AK weapons.
I am not going to bring up the big "R" word, there's no need for it. But I just want to simply state the obvious of why Liberal Democrats are in favor of the AWB, gun registration, and other gun control laws, and to remind you what our country's founding fathers felt about the gov't and our duties and responsibility to our country as American citizens to keep gov't in check.
nobody_special
member
It's not the liberal Democrats, and you do many people (and your own cause) a disservice by blaming them. Government is about control. The republicans are just as bad... consider that the republican congress and president signed the Patriot acts, the detainee bill, and a host of other legislation designed to remove freedoms (including removal of posse comitatus). And our great Decided
has openly stated that he would welcome another AWB.If you blame liberals, you run the risk of alienating libertarian liberals such as myself who have strong feelings in support of individual freedom and civil liberties, including the RKBA.
[Edited to add: I misspelled "Decider" as "Decided" ... in hindsight, maybe that misspelling was appropriate, since the guy clearly won't re-evaluate an opinion even when he's clearly wrong...]
thexrayboy
Member
I think this bill has been in the making for months, perhaps years. I bet McCarthy has been consulting with the evil wackos at VPC, Brady etc. to craft just such a bill. A bill worded so broadly as to essentially ban most new semiautomatic weapons that even remotely resemble an EBR. Including many guns that are suitable mostly for hunting. These people are crazy, immoral, evil, duplicitous and many other negative things. They are not stupid, they are for the most part accomplished political infighters. To blow them off as stupid people who have no chance of getting their agenda passed is to give them a huge advantage. We must fight this as hard as any other law. Whether it has only 1 sponsor or 100 makes no difference, if we take our mind off our task of opposing these evil laws they can be passed as a rider etc. Once a law such as this is on the books we will have hell to pay getting it off the books. Satan himself will sit on the throne in Congress before we ever see another sunset clause attached to an anti gun bill.
- Status
Similar threads
