Good News for the death of the AWB!!!!!!!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gixerman1000

Member
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
568
Location
Eastern USA
Good news for all of us, but don't stop now, keep fighting, if you have NOT wrote your Rep's yet do it NOW, and if you have do it again!!!!!!!!!!! Be sure to remind them that a vote “YES†will cost them allot more votes than a vote NO, and especially so if they have an "R" beside their name.

http://www.thehill.com/campaign/062304_gunban.aspx

CAMPAIGN 2004
Dems in tight races oppose gun ban
Sandlin, Stenholm fret over polarizing conservative voters
By Shweta Govindarajan


Some Democrats in tight re-election races are opposing a renewal of the assault-weapons ban, despite its overwhelming support from Democratic Party leaders.

The ban, which was enacted in 1994, prohibits the sale of certain assault weapons. With the ban’s expiration looming in September, several lawmakers are rallying to extend it for another 10 years.

However, the often contentious and polarizing issue has pinned some Democrats into an awkward political position of deciding whether to support their leaders or echo what their constituents want.

Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Democrats who oppose extending the ban are Rep. Charlie Stenholm, running against Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R) in Texas’s 19th District; Rep. Max Sandlin, seeking Texas’s 1st District seat; Rep. Rodney Alexander in Louisiana’s 5th District; and Rep. Rick Boucher in Virginia’s 9th District seat.

Rep. Martin Frost (D-Texas) supports the current ban but has not determined whether he would vote to renew it, according to Frost spokesman Justin Kitsch.

Kitsch said Frost, who is locked in a heated battle for the state’s 32nd District against incumbent Rep. Pete Sessions (R), does not expect the issue to come up before the election.

“We see no indication that the Republicans are going to bring this up,†he said.

But other Democrats have taken a firmer position.

“If a bill comes to floor that will renew assault weapons ban, I will vote against it,†said Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) “In my congressional district, we have many people who own firearms and use them responsibly. They oppose gun control, just as I do.â€

Meanwhile, the administration has kept mum on the issue, although Bush campaigned to renew the ban in 2000.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) has worked with lawmakers since 1994 to repeal the ban and is heading the effort to prevent the ban’s extension.


file photos
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gun control could be the issue that will decide the fate of many incumbents whose re-elections prospects hang in the balance, according to NRA spokeswoman Kelly Hobbs.

“The political graveyard is full of people who voted for this law in 1994. Gun owners went to the polls in droves to remove many of these [people], including the sitting speaker of the House, who voted to ban these firearms,†Hobbs said.
The NRA will not release its endorsements, including presidential and congressional, until the fall. But Hobbs said the NRA is certain that the ban will see its last day in September.

“We’re certainly making sure [lawmakers] understand the difference between fact and fiction. The House seems to have a good understanding of that because [it] voted to repeal the ban in 1996,†she said. “We’re confident this law would be allowed to sunset.â€

Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) introduced a bill in February that would add another decade to the assault-weapons ban.

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), the only Democratic co-sponsor of Castle’s bill, issued legislation in May that would not only extend the ban but expand it to include so-called “copycat†assault weapons, which are modified versions of the original weapons, according to Dylan Jones, McCarthy’s legislative director.

Jones said the bill could languish in committee for some time as a result of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay’s (R-Texas) strong opposition to the ban.

Gun-control advocates are hoping that Hastert (R-Ill.), who has been urged by police groups to extend the ban, will schedule a floor vote in the coming months. Asked last week if a floor vote will be scheduled, Hastert told The Hill, “I don’t know.â€

McCarthy this week criticized the NRA on the House floor, claiming the group is mischaracterizing the late President Reagan’s position on assault weapons: “During a close vote on the assault-weapons ban [in 1994], President Reagan made calls to undecided members urging for a yes vote.â€

McCarthy told The Hill that she is working with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) to garner support for extending the ban. She said it is unlikely Democrats will launch a discharge petition to force the ban bill to the floor. Instead, McCarthy said, she and Castle will work behind the scenes to secure a floor vote.

She added that Democrats will push the White House as well, saying, “Bush made a promise.â€

A Democratic leadership aide said Pelosi will apply pressure on Republicans to schedule a floor vote.

In the Northeast, Reps. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), who has been a vocal proponent of the ban, Nancy Johnson (R-Conn.), Jack Quinn (R-N.Y.) and Mike Ferguson (R-N.J.) support extending the ban and are among the co-sponsors of Castle’s bill.

Members who declined to comment by press time include Reps. Michael Michaud (D-Maine), running for re-election in the state’s 2nd District; Stephanie Herseth (D-S.D.), who recently defeated former state Sen. Larry Diedrich in a special election; and Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D.), who will challenge Republican Duane Sand in the fall.
 
“If a bill comes to floor that will renew assault weapons ban, I will vote against it,†said Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) “In my congressional district, we have many people who own firearms and use them responsibly. They oppose gun control, just as I do.â€
A voice of reason... from a Democrat? :eek:

Oh wait--they're from Virginia? That makes sense now. :)
 
That's great.

However, the Republican who represents my area is more of a RINO than any other, and supports the ban.

Even Arlen Specter wants the ban to die.

I have little doubt it will die this September.

However, I think it will pull a Jesus and come back.
 
However, I think it will pull a Jesus and come back.

Of course that is possible and it is hard to predict since we don't know how this year's elections will turn out.

But I would like to point out that it will be a very different fight if the AWB sunsets. Right now we just need the House and Senate to be unable to agree and pass anything. In other words, we just need Congress to do nothing. But after it sunsets they will have to actually pass a bill in both houses and get the President to sign it. It's a lot harder to actually do something than it is to do nothing.

Sure, it could happen. Kerry could win and the Democrats could take the Senate back. Even then they would have to somehow get past the GOP House leadership and that wouldn't be an automatic thing. Especially if the House was facing a Democratic Senate and President. It would cause the GOP House to be the place where the deals are made. (And there is no way in hell that the GOP is going to lose their majority in the House this election no matter what else happens.)

Gregg
 
Maybe my tinfoil hat is too tight, but...

I fear another Columbine-type incident before September this year. It's the only way I see the ban being renewed.

In '94, I don't think they had enough votes to pass the AWB, but the idiot who opened fire on the White House with the SKS got the fence-sitters to vote for it. That incident happened what? Within a week of the vote? Anyone remember?

If something happens again, I wonder how many of us will dismiss it as pure coincidence? Like I said - I may be paranoid, but I put nothing past the gun-grabbers.
 
“Bush made a promise.â€
Bush made a promise?? Nice spin, "W" said he would support the current laws, but no new ones. The current AWB has a sunset clause. Passing a NEW AWB or extension is a completely new bill and Bush has nothing to do with proposing/passing bills, just signin' them (or not.)
 
In '94, time ran out during the vote in the House, and the bill was failing by one vote. The Speaker (Tom Foley, Democrat), held the gavel in violation of House rules for about half an hour, while Dem reps browbeat another Dem to change his vote.

I saw video of this travesty. Time was expired, Foley was standing there, like a dummy, Newt Gengrich and the Republicans were yelling at him to close the vote according to House rules, while a bunch of Democratic reps were crowding and screaming at one man, practically assaulting him to force him to change his vote.
 
I fear another Columbine-type incident before September this year. It's the only way I see the ban being renewed.

I don't know. It would have to be really, really major. I'm still trying to figure out how the media is acting lately. I hesitate to think they are actually becoming more responsible! For instance, that guy who made the bulldozer into the tank. I saw that mentioned on one newscast. And I never saw any TV newscast that showed the pictures we saw around here. I'm _really_ surprised that the media didn't latch onto those guns as a way to push for a renewal of the AWB. Sure, nobody was killed and that does matter. But it seems _to me_ that the media has been reporting "nut with gun" stories in less detail lately. They don't give the shooter's name in many cases. They don't make it in to a major story.

I've always thought the media needed to admit that high profile coverage of these types of things makes them more likely. Many incidents are started by a deranged personality who is looking for a public way to commit suicide. If the stories don't get the coverage, some of them might not pick up a gun.

Gregg
 
I thought I read a description of them marching a woman down the aisle and she looked like she was about to die - didnt she tie it and Gore case a tie breaker?
 
So the article is saying the dems' posture on the AWB renewal is BS?

The way I see it the Republicans have nothing to lose by sunsetting the ban. The dems are not going to vote for them anyway. Republicans have a lot to lose by extending the ban.

The dems would lose voting for or against a measure to extend the ban. That is why they may not bring a bill to vote.

Here's some counter-statistics for the VPC and HCI: 90% of the American people want the AWB to end in September. Hey, BS works for them, why not for us!
 
We still have DiFie with her bill in the Senate - S.2498 - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=85987

and a possible/probable amendment attaching a rider to HR.218 - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=88479

and http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=88189 ...

Frankly, it's up in the air AFAIC, and only seat-loss pressure will keep them focused.

If we can kill it in the Senate then, probably, there's a reasonable expectation of sunset as the House will feel the pressure is off. But as long as it swirls around the Senate it's up for grabs. I'm still VERY perturbed with Warner's support for this C.R.A.P (Certified Ridiculously Artificial Politics).
 
Bush made a promise?? Nice spin, "W" said he would support the current laws, but no new ones. The current AWB has a sunset clause. Passing a NEW AWB or extension is a completely new bill and Bush has nothing to do with proposing/passing bills, just signin' them (or not.)


That's a case of semantics if I ever heard one. But, you're welcome to write the White House to tell him that. We can use all the letter writing we can get! :)
 
However, the often contentious and polarizing issue has pinned some Democrats into an awkward political position of deciding whether to support their leaders or echo what their constituents want.
It seems I recall from civics class that the politicians in the "House" were called "representatives" because they were supposed to do what their constituents want.
 
shep84 I would imagine a lot of those politicans remembered what happened to Tom Foley after he did that.

I remember regretting that i was just a hair too young to have the priviledge of DE-electing this scumbag.
 
Meanwhile, the administration has kept mum on the issue, although Bush campaigned to renew the ban in 2000.
Lie. He said he'd sign a renewal, but never campaigned for it.
 
and get the President to sign it

And if John "concealed":rolleyes: Kerry is elected, this is gonna be on his short list, even if it had gone away in Sept.

Remember that famous "Gang of Four" picture from March 3rd?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top