AWB2 Over-inflated?

[azredhawk44]

It has no co-sponsors.

It is driving sales like mad. I've fallen victim to it, and I'm sure other folks have too. I've spent about $1100 thus far since I've heard of it, on a new 1911 and an M14 receiver. I've committed to building a complete M14, no small task. I've bought several hundred dollars of reloading consumables.

Sportsman's Warehouse can barely keep primers on the shelf, and not all brands. 30-caliber rifle bullets are dang hard to find. .45 and 9mm pistol bullets are in-stock/out-of-stock on major online retailers. There's a run on 7.62 surplus from everyone stocking up.

NRA donations have to be pouring in, and I'm sure the Brady's are getting a buck or two as well. Lobby money is surely being spent on this bill.

It has no co-sponsors.

I hear this McCarthy crone introduces a similar bill every year, and that the Dems are too smart to try it this election cycle because they really want the presidency.

Is this all a tempest in a teapot?

 

[briansp82593]

im going to the gunshop and buying as much as possible
no one i mean no one will take my pride from me

 

[El Tejon]

Can't talk, busy hoarding magazines and guns like a badger in the winter.

BTW, I cannot understand the run on ammo. Where in 1022 is ammo banned? Shouldn't these guys be buying guns and mags?

 

[MD_Willington]

Well one thing for sure, business is brisk when there the possibility of an impending ban.

Maybe that is how they will make money to support new social programs/legislation they will use to stomp our rights...

Threaten a ban on item-X, we spend a lot of money on said item, the retailer collects federal taxes on it, those in power now have the funds to get the legislation done.

Seems like a vicious, self perpetuating cycle.

 

[azredhawk44]

im going to the gunshop and buying as much as possible
no one i mean no one will take my pride from me

This is an odd statement...

Guns=pride?

I can see your willingness to stand for your ideals = pride.

Buying at the gunshop creates a trace-able 4473 which can be used to take your guns from you.

You want guns that are hard to take away from you, then buy black powder replicas or private party used guns. The gunshop ain't gonna help you at all.

And creating this type of fervor in the gun community is what bills like this do best.

 

[Correia]

Yes, I'm afraid you're too smart for us. We, the Ultra-Powerful Gun Industry, got McCarthy to write this bill for us to boost sales.

The original AWB? That was us too. We had lots of 10+ round magazines and muzzle brakes in stock, and needed to move them.

McCarthy is actually one of our minions. In reality, McCarthy is an actor we hired to play a rabid anti-gunner. In reality he is actually a classically trained Shakespearean midget actor. His name is Tim. We use CGI to make him look like that, kind of like how they made Gandalf look so much taller than the hobbits in Lord Of The Rings.

FOPA '86, yep, that was us trying to increase the value of our registered machine guns. Sadly mine were destroyed when Dick Cheney blew up the levies in New Orleans. He forgot to tell me he was going to do that.

If you will excuse me now, I have to go play a round of golf with Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer, on the moon.

 

[azredhawk44]

If you will excuse me now, I have to go play a round of golf with Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer, on the moon.

Is that in NASA studio #6, or studio #7?

I am a member of the NRA, but I know that the NRA cannot exist without money coming in from members. The Brady's are the same.

This bill feeds both furnaces, and feeds political war-chests of the DNC and GOP by means of lobbyist contributions.

I don't think it is too far-fetched for this to be a whole lotta nothing, fueled just a little bit by folks who might make a buck off of it.

 

[alucard0822]

I take any attacks on my personal liberties and rights seriously. In maryland we are still fighting a big semi-auto ban. I am not collecting ammo and rifles, well at least not any more than I normally do. If we organize, write letters and appear at hearings en masse with the same effort that we hoard stuff we wouldn't have to worry about bans in the first place. We have more people that own guns, hunt, or belive in our right to own them than those that don't. If we make noise and get active to the levels of those fighting for civil rights in the 60's it would be political suicide to introduce a gun ban. If you accept the idea that one person can't affect politics and we will lose go ahead and stock up. If you belive we can defeat SB43, HR1022, or any other infringement that are all but guaranteed to follow then fight and fight hard.

 

[MD_Willington]

I'm saying that a lot of people will simply rush out and spend like crazy, they don't consider what will happen if enough people do this. The same happened in States where they found gold during the gold rushes, otherwise worthless land became top dollar real-estate, simple Mercantiles and services became highly priced...

 

[Autolycus]

Originally posted by Correia:
Yes, I'm afraid you're too smart for us. We, the Ultra-Powerful Gun Industry, got McCarthy to write this bill for us to boost sales.

The original AWB? That was us too. We had lots of 10+ round magazines and muzzle brakes in stock, and needed to move them.

McCarthy is actually one of our minions. In reality, McCarthy is an actor we hired to play a rabid anti-gunner. In reality he is actually a classically trained Shakespearean midget actor. His name is Tim. We use CGI to make him look like that, kind of like how they made Gandalf look so much taller than the hobbits in Lord Of The Rings.

FOPA '86, yep, that was us trying to increase the value of our registered machine guns. Sadly mine were destroyed when Dick Cheney blew up the levies in New Orleans. He forgot to tell me he was going to do that.

If you will excuse me now, I have to go play a round of golf with Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer, on the moon.

Did you guys have JFK killed to in hopes of more gun control laws? And are you a stonecutter like on the Simpsons?

And if so can I join?

 

[Autolycus]

I would rather not risk it. My state is trying to pass an AWB currently. I will be leaving as soon as college is done. Sooner if I can possibly swing a way to leave early.

I want to move somewhere that will allow me to have a 100 round magazine for the AR I plan to buy. Or that says yeah if you want a handgun with 20 rounds go right ahead, hell... why not 30?

 

[Correia]

Did you guys have JFK killed to in hopes of more gun control laws? And are you a stonecutter like on the Simpsons?

Nope. JFK was killed by my enemies, the Illuminati. (but he was killed in 1975, that was actually Elvis that got shot in Dallas) But we totally capitalized on it so we wouldn't have to compete with those mail order gun dealers. And yeah, I can get you into the Stonecutters. The ring that gets you free sodas from the vending machines totally rocks.




Okay, seriously? I'm glad to see people buying lots of stuff right now. I want as many people as possible to have some skin in this game. The more EBRs we get into circulation, the more mainstream we become.

And once something is mainstream, it is hard to ban it.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Well, the bill has no cosponsors right now. The last bill she introduced in 2005 had zero co-sponsors for almost a month and ultimately ended up with 94 co-sponsors (or 33 more than Chuck Schumer had when he passed an AWB through the House in 1994 on a 216-214 vote).

Since she needs 20 votes to get it out of committee and already has 17 of those votes and a Democrat controlled House, I think the prudent thing to do is to assume it represents a threat and keep an eye on it.

If nothing else, this will tell us how dedicated the Dems are to avoiding angry gun owners. If they let this bill come out of committee before the 2008 election, it will be a strong sign that they still don't think we matter and aren't afraid of us. If they keep it bottled up, then we know that either they have had a change of heart (ha!) or they are afraid of us. Either one would represent an improvement compared to the past record.

 

[MD_Willington]

I think they will avoid it like the plague until they get their person in oval office...

 

[The Deer Hunter]

Its an excuse to buy lots of guns fast.


"hunny, if I dont buy them now, I will never get the chance..."

 

[I LIKE IT!]

We all know deep down that it's coming, just a matter of time.

BRACE FOR IMPACT!!:banghead:

 

[jfh]

and once more, Bart and Correia have it nailed.

My own contribution to the conspiracies abounding about is a seque, but I think it is accurate: The Bloomington, MN "Military Armaments" story is the attempt to float up a new set of antigun concepts for the Public to swallow.

IOW, this time is similar to the "runup years" in the early Nineties. Do you guys remember that the first time the term "assault weapons" hit it big time in the MSM was the day after the Luby's cafeteria incident? That was when the lightbulb went on for me, and I chased that term back to its source that day--it was an AP writer in WA DC. But that's another story, too.

More on this in another thread--but given F4GIB's take yesterday on the Bloomington incident, it sure makes sense. Courtesy of last fall's elections, we have (another) ambitious DFL AG; the Bloomington Police People tend to be PC.

I've got a reporter friend who might be willing to dig into this story.

Jim H.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

I don't think i will make it out of committee. The Democrats know it is political suicide to vote for a new AWB. The best way for the Republicans to take power again in 2008 is for the Dems to let this bill go to a floor vote.

The only people in the Democratic party who support this are the ones who are putting their personal beliefs ahead of their desire for power and control.

There are very few people in either party willing to do that.

 

[Art Eatman]

Lobbying money spent NOW might well be more effective and thus more useful--more bang for the buck --than later on. Try to instill fear--or at least wariness now, rather than wait until they have the bit in their teeth.

And regardless of what happens in 2008, the House types are up for re-election in 2010. All those folks seriously love being re-elected.

Art

 

[I LIKE IT!]

I really don't think the Democrats/liberals care about political suicide.
They have more sheep/clueless on their side, not to mention the media and the these new liberal republicans.

Better to treat all "threats" as such regardless of it's chances.

 

[xd9fan]

With the GOP as it is........its a real threat. And given the fact the every gun law on the book had GOP votes.......Only the Libertarians are the real "pro GUN" party......if you what to be accurate.

 

[rhubarb]

Thank you Bart for your clear assessment of the risk.

I have believed since November that the threat is real. I bought my first EBR a week or two before AWB II was introduced. However, I also wondered if this was the One or the same loony McCarthy bill as always. I wondered if there was really a possibility of support.

Thanks to your analysis, I will take this and all gun-ban attempts by Congress completely serious.

 

[benEzra]

I got burned very badly for not taking the original AWB seriously. I had been wanting a folding stock for my mini-14 for a couple of years, but had never made it a financial priority (it was only $79, but I was newly married and we had other financial priorities). I didn't think the ban had any chance whatsoever of passing--like my dad said at the time, "they won't do that, this is America."

Well, they did, and suddenly it became a Federal felony for me to even possess a folder and my Ranch Rifle at the same time, never mind install one...

So I waited TEN YEARS to be able to buy the stock I wanted...

I learned my lesson this time. If this bill looks like it has a decent chance of passing, I am getting an AR if I have to take out a second mortgage to do so. I'm also doing what I can to help ensure it doesn't pass...

 

[emitt1]

I agree with benEzra. With the current makeup of our congress, and the expected results of the next election (and don't kid yourself, he or she stand a good chance of election) the new AWB2 stands as a very large dark hole on our future. Don't purchase in panic, simply invest in our yet unknown future.

 

[Thin Black Line]

IOW, this time is similar to the "runup years" in the early Nineties. Do you guys remember that the first time the term "assault weapons" hit it big time in the MSM was the day after the Luby's cafeteria incident? That was when the lightbulb went on for me, and I chased that term back to its source that day--it was an AP writer in WA DC. But that's another story, too.

Actually, this has been part of a larger picture first put into public print since
at least 1961:

Freedom From War
The United States Program
for General and Complete
Disarmament in a Peaceful
World


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

DEPARTMENT OF STATE PUBLICATION 7277
Disarmament Series 5
Released September 1961

....snip....

The progressive steps to be taken during the final phase of the disarmament program would be directed toward the attainment of a world in which:
(a) States would retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order; they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a U.N Peace Force.
(b) The U.N. Peace Force, equipped with agreed types and quantities of armaments, would be fully functioning.
(c) The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes.
(d) The peace-keeping capabilities of the United Nations would be sufficiently strong and the obligations of all states under such arrangements sufficiently far-reaching as to assure peace and the just settlement of differences in a disarmed world.

So, no, AWB2 is not over-inflated in any way.