I don't get something about the sunset clause of the AWB

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dbl0Kevin

Member
Joined
May 26, 2004
Messages
1,183
Location
SC
It has been said before that the only way the AWB was going to be passed was if the sunset clause was included to make it go away after 10 years. I don't get how the heck that would change anybody's mind about it?? I mean if you think something is a bad law and want it to go away in 10 years.....why on earth would you vote for it now to be in effect for a decade?? Am I missing something here cause it sure seems like it? :confused:
 
they took a gamble that they could ratchet up the rhetoric on gun control and make it worse and permanant in the last part of President Gore's first term.


They didn't count on the fact that a lot more Americans oppose gun control then they thought ... they passed it riding a high after Columbine and the other school shootings, they didn't think Republicans would gain the whitehouse and gain ground in the house and senate and they didn't expect that 9/11 would piss a lot of Americans off and we'd realise that guns are good.
 
Standing Wolf is right. Par for the course.

AWB went into effect Sept 14th 1994. Columbine was April 20th 1999.

I'm also in agreement that every single law on the books should have a sunset provision. If the legislature can't be bothered to revist the issues every 5-10 years then how in the world am I supposed to keep track of all the stuff they do?

If there are too many laws on the books to be read, debated, voted on, and passed in a 10 year timespan then there are too many for me to conceivably follow in my daily life.
 
GigaBuist - I think you are onto something there. Maybe most or all laws should expire and need more votes to keep them going.

It makes sense from the standpoint that our society changes over time and one problem that has always existed with many laws is that they often create more problems than they solve.

Prohibition is a good example of a law that should have been passed with an expiration date. It was controversial, which is a definite qualifier for expiration, imho.

Also requireing a re-vote to keep a law in place holds our law-makers more acountable. If they pass a bad law and somehow stay re-elected, they have to really believe in that law to do that again.

Heck, we have so many laws on the books now, that we probably have more than the NFL has rules, which is a bunch. I don't think the US was founded under the idea of seeing how many laws we can pass.
 
It makes sense from the standpoint that our society changes over time and one problem that has always existed with many laws is that they often create more problems than they solve.
Click to expand...

Thats why the founding fathers built the ability to change into the consitution.
 
THe impetus for the AWB was the Long Island Railroad shooting by Colin Ferguson in December, 1993. It was after that even that Chuckie Cheese Schumer wrote the AWB.

Ferguson was a huge racist who wanted to kill the white people. He had a Ruger P-89 that he legally purchased. He shot 25 people killing 6. He reloaded the gun 3 times with 15 shot magazines before he was taken down between reloads. He was using black talon ammo. Survivors of the shooting sued Winchester over the ammo. There was tons of negative press talking about the "buzz saw effect" in human flesh. It was said to be designed to be both armor piercing as well as inflict the maximum possible damage in a person, shredding their flesh. I remember seeing one story where they claimed surgeons refused to operate on people shot with black talons, the fragments were so 'razor sharp' the surgeons were in grave danger. THe suit was tossed but Winchester stopped marketing black talon. I believe they still sell the exact same ammo to LEO only under the name RANGER SXT.
 
Standing Wolf is correct on both points.

Remember, they didn't have the votes for an outright 'forever' ban, so attaching a sunset clause is one way of getting a fence-sitting senator or house member to vote for the law.
 
Not to quibble, but I think the Columbine massacre happened after the so-called "assault weapons" ban.
Click to expand...
Ah yes ... I stand corrected.

But wasn't there some school shooting used by the AWB supporters to get it passed?
 
I have a related question/statment. How can ignorance of the law Not be a defense when the laws are so complicated that lawyers have to specialize.

Best Regards,
Sam
 
A co-worker friend sold his Glock and Black talons as a package deal. They guy really wanted the ammo, but not the Glock. My friend wouldn't split them up, so they guy bought it all just to have the ammo. He thought it would shoot up in value like crazy since it was "Banned".:rolleyes:
 
But wasn't there some school shooting used by the AWB supporters to get it passed?
Click to expand...

You might be thinking of the California bans, boosted by: "The Stockton schoolyard massacre - On January 17, 1989, Patrick Purdy killed 5 small children, and wounded 29 others and 1 teacher at the Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California, using a semi-automatic version of the AK-47 assault rifle imported from China. That weapon had been purchased from a gun dealer in Oregon and was equipped with a 75-round "drum" magazine. Purdy shot 106 rounds in less than 2 minutes."
 
And Ranger LEO is still available commercially.

I sell the stuff at the gun shows to the chagrin of the Black Talon stockpilers.
 
...clause was included to make it go away after 10 years. I don't get how the heck that would change anybody's mind about it?? I mean if you think something is a bad law and want it to go away in 10 years.....why on earth would you vote for it now...
Click to expand...
It's not about right or wrong. It's about what can they do that will make the most voters happy with them and the least number of voters unhappy with them. The AWB was on the fence. They figured that they could make gungrabbers happy by passing it and pro-gunnies not as unhappy by saying it's just temporary. The phrase "don't burn your bridges" was likely coined by a politician.
 
The sunset clause was added to get the one extra vote needed for passage - from Republican Bob Dole.

Funny how Republicans are so critical and helpful in achieving Democratic socialist goals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Florida CCW/F Licenseholder confidentiality: sunset clause
Replies
0
Views
397
MedWheeler
M
P
  • Locked
Don't Get Happy About The AWB Sunset Yet
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
Publicola
P
S
  • Locked
So, does the AWB sunset actually at 12:00 am on Sep. 13th or 14th?
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
Bartholomew Roberts
B
T
  • Locked
Time for a History Lesson
Replies
10
Views
1K
Baba Louie
Baba Louie
M
  • Locked
After the AWB sunsets...
Replies
1
Views
573
Lone_Gunman
L
Back
Top