mdsteele
Member
http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=US&cat=Gun_Control_Debate
These idiots just won't stop!
These idiots just won't stop!
Another battle. AWB
- Thread starter mdsteele
- Start date
- Status
ksnecktieman
Member
mdsteele? Can you copy and paste that here? I do not care to volunteer for their spam list.
Zach S
Member
2 groups plan suit on ban of assault weapons
Thu Mar 18, 9:40 AM ET
By Kristina Herrndobler Washington Bureau
Gun-control activists plan to file a lawsuit Thursday alleging that the Bush administration has failed to enforce a ban on the production and sale of semiautomatic weapons, one of several efforts by advocates to raise awareness that the assault weapons ban is set to expire this fall.
Advocates are trying to persuade lawmakers to extend the ban, but experts say it is unlikely the Republican-controlled Congress will bring it to a vote in an election year.
The 1994 law banned 19 specific semiautomatic assault weapons and copies of those guns. The law allowed existing assault weapons to remain in use, but some senators say they expected that the pre-ban weapons would become obsolete over time and the number of guns on the street would decline.
The lawsuit to be filed by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the Million Mom March, a gun-control advocacy group, alleges that companies are rebuilding and resurrecting unusable pre-ban weapons with the permission of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The groups contend that the bureau has no legal right to grant that permission.
The groups acknowledge that even if they win, the victory would be short-lived if the assault weapons ban expires as scheduled Sept. 13.
"We are doing everything we possibly can to make sure that doesn't happen," said Dennis Henigan, legal director of the Brady Campaign.
The National Rifle Association says the ban is ineffective and should expire.
"When the ban was enacted 10 years ago, it was intended as an experiment to see if it would be effective in preventing crime," said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. "Since then, numerous studies have shown that this ban has not achieved that goal."
The Senate this month approved an amendment to extend the ban but then killed the bill that carried the amendment.
Some senators think they can get Congress to pass an extension but admit they face an uphill battle. Even if they can't get legislation renewing the ban passed, they hope they can bring the issue to the center of the presidential campaign.
President Bush (news - web sites) said he supported the assault weapons ban during the 2000 campaign, but he has not put pressure on Congress to approve an extension.
White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said, "The president has made his views known on this issue and they are unchanged," but Buchan would not elaborate on the topic or explain Bush's views.
Democratic presidential contender John Kerry (news - web sites) supports the ban and says he would work to renew it if he is elected.
Even if the Senate were to pass legislation to extend the ban, it is unlikely that House leaders would allow the issue to come to the floor for debate, so supporters are looking for other ways to pass the measure.
"We've already shown that the Senate is in support of it," said David Hantman, spokesman for Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a leading advocate for the assault weapons ban. "The question is how to get it to the president's desk when you have [House Majority Leader] Tom DeLay saying it will never happen."
Feinstein is looking for a way to get the extension through Congress, possibly by attaching it to other legislation, but Hantman said "there is no question many people will try to take it out."
John Feehery, spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), said the assault weapons ban "is not on [the House leadership's] radar screen right now."
John Bruce, a professor of political science at the University of Mississippi, said it is "unlikely that [the ban] would be extended. . . . But its failure to pass doesn't preclude its use as a political issue."
Bruce said if Bush and Kerry are close in the polls, Bush may again announce his support for the ban without having to actually sign it into law.
"The White House can say `we support this,' wink-wink, nod-nod toward House leadership knowing the House leadership has no intention of having a vote," Bruce said.
The Brady Campaign's lawsuit will allege that the ATF violated the assault weapons ban by granting gun manufactures permission to replace receivers--the firing mechanism of the gun that the law defines as the gun itself--and give pre-ban guns new serial numbers.
"Their policy has resulted in more [assault weapons] being on the streets than what would have been the case," Henigan said. "If you can't manufacture new ones, over time you would expect that number to decline. ATF, through this illegal policy, is thereby ensuring that these weapons will remain operational for many years to come."
ATF officials who asked not to be named said the law does allow for receivers of pre-ban guns to be replaced.
---------------------------------------------
Below is the email I got from awbansunset.com
---------------------------------------------
Today the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the not-quite-a-Million Mom March announced a lawsuit against the Bush administration, alleging that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives illegally gave permission to firearms manufacturers to refurbish pre-ban "assault weapons" by replacing receivers. A firearm's receiver is the one part that is treated as a "gun" (and not just a gun part), and is marked with the gun's serial number.
The suit alleges that firearms manufacturers replaced broken or defective receivers with newly manufactured one, and that this constituted the illegal manufacture of an "assault weapon."
Details are still forthcoming, but, given how cautious the ATF generally is in interpreting gun control laws, it is unlikely that they granted such permission without sufficient justification and precedent. After all, if a defective pre-ban receiver cannot be repaired and is replaced with a new one by the manufacturer, and the old one destroyed, there is no net increase in the number of "assault weapons."
The "smoking gun" that Brady uncovered are some letters between Bushmaster (requesting info from the ATF on how to handle broken pre-ban receivers that must be replaced), and the ATF (which instructs Bushmaster on the procedure they must follow, as defined by law)... these letters were dated 1996-1997.
It is unlikely that this suit will go anywhere, and, by the organizations' own admission, is primarily a publicity stunt aimed at generating support for renewing the ban.
Thu Mar 18, 9:40 AM ET
By Kristina Herrndobler Washington Bureau
Gun-control activists plan to file a lawsuit Thursday alleging that the Bush administration has failed to enforce a ban on the production and sale of semiautomatic weapons, one of several efforts by advocates to raise awareness that the assault weapons ban is set to expire this fall.
Advocates are trying to persuade lawmakers to extend the ban, but experts say it is unlikely the Republican-controlled Congress will bring it to a vote in an election year.
The 1994 law banned 19 specific semiautomatic assault weapons and copies of those guns. The law allowed existing assault weapons to remain in use, but some senators say they expected that the pre-ban weapons would become obsolete over time and the number of guns on the street would decline.
The lawsuit to be filed by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the Million Mom March, a gun-control advocacy group, alleges that companies are rebuilding and resurrecting unusable pre-ban weapons with the permission of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The groups contend that the bureau has no legal right to grant that permission.
The groups acknowledge that even if they win, the victory would be short-lived if the assault weapons ban expires as scheduled Sept. 13.
"We are doing everything we possibly can to make sure that doesn't happen," said Dennis Henigan, legal director of the Brady Campaign.
The National Rifle Association says the ban is ineffective and should expire.
"When the ban was enacted 10 years ago, it was intended as an experiment to see if it would be effective in preventing crime," said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. "Since then, numerous studies have shown that this ban has not achieved that goal."
The Senate this month approved an amendment to extend the ban but then killed the bill that carried the amendment.
Some senators think they can get Congress to pass an extension but admit they face an uphill battle. Even if they can't get legislation renewing the ban passed, they hope they can bring the issue to the center of the presidential campaign.
President Bush (news - web sites) said he supported the assault weapons ban during the 2000 campaign, but he has not put pressure on Congress to approve an extension.
White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said, "The president has made his views known on this issue and they are unchanged," but Buchan would not elaborate on the topic or explain Bush's views.
Democratic presidential contender John Kerry (news - web sites) supports the ban and says he would work to renew it if he is elected.
Even if the Senate were to pass legislation to extend the ban, it is unlikely that House leaders would allow the issue to come to the floor for debate, so supporters are looking for other ways to pass the measure.
"We've already shown that the Senate is in support of it," said David Hantman, spokesman for Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a leading advocate for the assault weapons ban. "The question is how to get it to the president's desk when you have [House Majority Leader] Tom DeLay saying it will never happen."
Feinstein is looking for a way to get the extension through Congress, possibly by attaching it to other legislation, but Hantman said "there is no question many people will try to take it out."
John Feehery, spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), said the assault weapons ban "is not on [the House leadership's] radar screen right now."
John Bruce, a professor of political science at the University of Mississippi, said it is "unlikely that [the ban] would be extended. . . . But its failure to pass doesn't preclude its use as a political issue."
Bruce said if Bush and Kerry are close in the polls, Bush may again announce his support for the ban without having to actually sign it into law.
"The White House can say `we support this,' wink-wink, nod-nod toward House leadership knowing the House leadership has no intention of having a vote," Bruce said.
The Brady Campaign's lawsuit will allege that the ATF violated the assault weapons ban by granting gun manufactures permission to replace receivers--the firing mechanism of the gun that the law defines as the gun itself--and give pre-ban guns new serial numbers.
"Their policy has resulted in more [assault weapons] being on the streets than what would have been the case," Henigan said. "If you can't manufacture new ones, over time you would expect that number to decline. ATF, through this illegal policy, is thereby ensuring that these weapons will remain operational for many years to come."
ATF officials who asked not to be named said the law does allow for receivers of pre-ban guns to be replaced.
---------------------------------------------
Below is the email I got from awbansunset.com
---------------------------------------------
Today the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the not-quite-a-Million Mom March announced a lawsuit against the Bush administration, alleging that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives illegally gave permission to firearms manufacturers to refurbish pre-ban "assault weapons" by replacing receivers. A firearm's receiver is the one part that is treated as a "gun" (and not just a gun part), and is marked with the gun's serial number.
The suit alleges that firearms manufacturers replaced broken or defective receivers with newly manufactured one, and that this constituted the illegal manufacture of an "assault weapon."
Details are still forthcoming, but, given how cautious the ATF generally is in interpreting gun control laws, it is unlikely that they granted such permission without sufficient justification and precedent. After all, if a defective pre-ban receiver cannot be repaired and is replaced with a new one by the manufacturer, and the old one destroyed, there is no net increase in the number of "assault weapons."
The "smoking gun" that Brady uncovered are some letters between Bushmaster (requesting info from the ATF on how to handle broken pre-ban receivers that must be replaced), and the ATF (which instructs Bushmaster on the procedure they must follow, as defined by law)... these letters were dated 1996-1997.
It is unlikely that this suit will go anywhere, and, by the organizations' own admission, is primarily a publicity stunt aimed at generating support for renewing the ban.
Zach S
Member
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
Duplicate thread as above.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked