mrbro
Member
It's a dead issue in the house or the senate, but expect it to be brought up a lot as we're in the fundraising portion of the election season.
Another Call for the AWB
- Thread starter cbrgator
- Start date
- Status
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
Nero fiddled while Rome burned.
merlinfire
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2010
- Messages
- 793
Was it because they didn't have enough AR's?
mortablunt
Member
I will fight this one to the end. I did not drive 7 hours yesterday round trip through traffic in order to save my guns just so that they can all be banned later.
I give the motion to say that the first motion sucks a second.
I give the motion to say that the first motion sucks a second.
Cosmoline
Member
There are a lot of Dems who would support the SMB-- Schumer Mouth Ban.
mortablunt
Member
^ hear hear!
<MoA
Member
Send Chuckles a personal message!
While it's a useless gesture, I still went just now to Schumer's website and sent my dear friend (snort... gag... barf...) Chuckie a carefully worded e-mail. I know, I know; one of his panting lap-dog staffers, some dewy-arm-pitted co-ed who just loves the work he/she's doing "for the cause", and who also realizes that "They Know Best", and it's "all for your own good", will briefly read and then delete it.
Then they'll make a check-mark note in the BIG BOOK of how the people are responding. Chuckle's will NEVER read any such messages. He's seen it all by now, of course, and knows only too well how much a big percentage of the population hate his innards...
But still, I just had to do it. You guys are right: more unfocused gun control legislation is the third rail of American politics, and the Dems know it, so this is just Chuckles grandstanding for his loyal base.
But wouldn't it be fun to be in an un-censored & open TV debate with this toad-head, where he had to correctly and honestly answer some questions? No side-stepping or re-directions allowed by some uber-liberal adjudicator?
T'ain't ever gonna happen, and so he gets to feed at the good old trough of government-funded employment (*oh yeah, and retirement bennies...)
While it's a useless gesture, I still went just now to Schumer's website and sent my dear friend (snort... gag... barf...) Chuckie a carefully worded e-mail. I know, I know; one of his panting lap-dog staffers, some dewy-arm-pitted co-ed who just loves the work he/she's doing "for the cause", and who also realizes that "They Know Best", and it's "all for your own good", will briefly read and then delete it.
Then they'll make a check-mark note in the BIG BOOK of how the people are responding. Chuckle's will NEVER read any such messages. He's seen it all by now, of course, and knows only too well how much a big percentage of the population hate his innards...
But still, I just had to do it. You guys are right: more unfocused gun control legislation is the third rail of American politics, and the Dems know it, so this is just Chuckles grandstanding for his loyal base.
But wouldn't it be fun to be in an un-censored & open TV debate with this toad-head, where he had to correctly and honestly answer some questions? No side-stepping or re-directions allowed by some uber-liberal adjudicator?
T'ain't ever gonna happen, and so he gets to feed at the good old trough of government-funded employment (*oh yeah, and retirement bennies...)
mortablunt
Member
I have just created a thread in another forum about this. I am hoping to rally people against such an action. Here's the link: http://personalitycafe.com/current-events/58546-new-call-assault-weapons-ban.html
mrbro
Member
It's a dead issue, but maybe not for the reasons you think it is. The liberal base is still very much in favor of it, but it can't get through the house with the present majority, and it officially died in the senate when Reid was put in charge.
Erik M
Member
The feds screwed up thier field operations and let the drug runners buy guns and take them back to Mexico and the sting fell through. so taking guns away from law abiding American citizens will solve the problem how? go back under your rock henry waxman, I don't want to hear you rattling off west coat liberal ignorance tonight.
belercous
Member
This is not an issue. Seriously, who is credulous enough to believe an AWB could be enacted? Didn't hear much about one when Democrats controlled both houses & the Presidency. Now it's time to be worried when the GOP controls the House and has more seats in the Senate? An AWB is a political impossibility.
This is the kind of hysteria the NRA uses for fund-raising. (Along with that old chestnut of the UN small arms treaty that's gonna take our guns. I remember that one from the 1970's. Still hasn't came close to happening.)
And Nero played the lyre, not the lute.
This is the kind of hysteria the NRA uses for fund-raising. (Along with that old chestnut of the UN small arms treaty that's gonna take our guns. I remember that one from the 1970's. Still hasn't came close to happening.)
And Nero played the lyre, not the lute.
I started this thread not to invoke hysteria, but to remind us that we can never become complacent. You are correct that an AWB is seemingly impossible in this political climate. That does not mean we should ignore threats to our liberty. By discussing these threats openly and frequently, the issue remains at the forefront and continues to be politically impossible. If we ignore them, forget about them, or become complacent, the impossibility of such legislation begins to recede.
The purpose of this thread is simply: Remain vigilant. Nothing more.
Last edited:
Travis McGee
Member
They're a little anxious to draw the connection here.
All they are doing is "outing" the true motivation for Operation Fast and Furious.
All they are doing is "outing" the true motivation for Operation Fast and Furious.
Sheepdog1968
Member
I tend to agree. The republicans have a majority in the House and as a general rule most of them are pro gun. Also, in 1994 when the first one passed, the Democarts got nailed in the next election and are aware of this. Of course, I will still keep an eye on it and write my congress reps (Pelosi in the house; Feinstein and Boxer in the Senate - ugh).
Deanimator
Member
I propose that we adopt legislation that imposes the death penalty on any employee of the US DoJ who willfully allows firearms to be illegally transferred and which end up in Mexico.
While I can understand the need to be ever watchful and think we should be, the reason we have these meeting grounds is so that we can share info on who is doing what to our liberties. The first ban got put in place with out much fighting. Yes it was one of the reasons the D's got canned the next election and yes many of them are worried about it, at least those that ever fear not being reelected, but that was also in 1994. 17 years ago. That in politics is an eternity. There are plenty of new faces in congress that do not remember what happened. So it is needed to keep reminding them not to mess around with those sorts of legislation.
I think Obama is so screwed, he may give us tax incentives to buy assault rifles. Cash for single action rifles. like the clunkers. . Along with food stamps for ammo. He's such a con man he could work it into his act somehow. Maybe tee shirts with his birth certificate on them. Perhaps a good old sex scandle will get him some sympathy.
Erik M
Member
these already exist, sadly.
But to steer this discussion back towards OP's post, I have always believed that the government stands to make to much money in taxes from weapons and ammo sales. NICS isn't even operated by the government, its operated by contractors with oversight from the FBI. How much taxes could they levy against guns before people would stop buying them? How much could the price of ammo be artificially inflated strictly for government profit? Ive never been much on conspiracy's but I know if there is money to be made no arm or party of the federal bureaucracy will take a loss. There are already tax stamps on silencers, is it really that far fetched that they would want that applied to every black rifle? just a thought open to interpretation.
Erik M said:
Already done. It is called the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act of 1937.
It imposes an 11% tax on firearms and ammunition at the federal level.
This is built into the price tag of firearms and ammunition you purchase.
You then pay taxes on top of those taxes with state sales tax that factors in that federal tax as part of the original cost.
So just off the top with sales tax firearms and ammunition are around 20% tax in my state. And that does not include the additional hidden firearm business specific taxes aka licenses, fees, etc the business must pass on to the consumer.
This could probably be repealed successfully with the 2nd being ruled an individual right. It is like an illegal poll tax.
I wonder how much of that money actually goes to the wilderness and how much is diverted to other government projects, as the government rarely feels compelled to spend money from sources of 'revenue' on what the tax was originally imposed for.
Already done. It is called the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act of 1937.
It imposes an 11% tax on firearms and ammunition at the federal level.
This is built into the price tag of firearms and ammunition you purchase.
You then pay taxes on top of those taxes with state sales tax that factors in that federal tax as part of the original cost.
So just off the top with sales tax firearms and ammunition are around 20% tax in my state. And that does not include the additional hidden firearm business specific taxes aka licenses, fees, etc the business must pass on to the consumer.
This could probably be repealed successfully with the 2nd being ruled an individual right. It is like an illegal poll tax.
I wonder how much of that money actually goes to the wilderness and how much is diverted to other government projects, as the government rarely feels compelled to spend money from sources of 'revenue' on what the tax was originally imposed for.
Revolver fan
Member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 30
question reguarding an AWB
So if one was to happen again:banghead:, would buying 7.62x39/5.56 ammo be legal ? you just couldn't buy AK/M4/M16 and other type of guns + magazines, still legal to own and shoot at the range?
So if one was to happen again:banghead:, would buying 7.62x39/5.56 ammo be legal ? you just couldn't buy AK/M4/M16 and other type of guns + magazines, still legal to own and shoot at the range?
General Geoff
Member
It's not so simple; an AWB would entail, well, whatever is in the wording of the bill. If enough pro-tyranny folks were in congress, they could just as easily ban the sale of all ammunition in calibers of current military usage, or worse.
MikeNice
Member
To these guys all ARs are military grade weapons. To some any semi-auto gun is a military grade weapon. Technically any 9mm semi-auto pistol is a "military grade weapon." Our boys carry the M9 loaded with 9mm ball ammo.
If they want to stop truly military grade weapons from making it to Mexico they need to talk to the CIA, DEA, ATF, and Department of Defense. A lot of these guns are left overs from our South American adventures in the last decades of the 20th century.
Then you have companies like Colt that are allowed to sell guns and "training" to the Mexican Army. We know their spec-ops soldiers defected to create at least one cartel. We know that their police and soldiers routinely work both sides of the fence and pass along weapons. So, we need to restrict State Department approved sales to the Mexican Government.
That is how we stop "American guns" from ending up in the hands of guys like Los Zetas.
Trust me that isn't what any of these politicians have in mind. They want your AR15. They want your 20 and 30 round clips. They want you to become a felon for owning them so that they can take the rest of your guns under existing laws. Don't be fooled by the word play.
- Status
