Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

If the AWB is renewed, how will you vote?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Publicola, Jul 17, 2004.

?

Will you vote for Bush if an "Assault Weapons" ban renewal is signed?

  1. I'll vote against Bush

    75 vote(s)
    54.7%
  2. I'l reluctantly vote against Bush

    17 vote(s)
    12.4%
  3. I'l reluctantly vote for Bush

    32 vote(s)
    23.4%
  4. I'll vote for Bush

    13 vote(s)
    9.5%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Publicola

    Publicola Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    226
    Location:
    Colorado
    A simple question but possibly with a complex answer.

    If you would please elaborate on your decision.
     
  2. 71Commander

    71Commander Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,336
    Location:
    Headin back to Johnson City
    I'll vote against Bush.

    Might as well get the revolt started. I want to be young enough to participate.:D
     
  3. KRAUTGUNNER

    KRAUTGUNNER Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    255
    If I could vote in the 2004 presidential election (not very likely; They won't allow a gun nut Kraut to vote in GOD'S OWN COUNTRY :evil: ) , I would vote for Mr. Badnarik, IF Bush renews the AWB.

    Certainly NOT for that §$%&ing Kerry @$$#*+~ !!! :cuss: :fire:
     
  4. boofus

    boofus Guest

    If AWB goes away Bush gets my vote. Otherwise Badnarik will get it and I will never vote for a Republican again unless it is Ron Paul.
     
  5. Sleeping Dog

    Sleeping Dog Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,255
    Location:
    MI
    I'll vote for Bush.

    If I use my vote for some 3rd party candidate, Libertarian or otherwise, it just helps Kerry/Edwards. And they'll do worse than just renew a ban against bayonet lugs.

    I think the AWB is just a ban against cosmetic features on guns. It's meaningless and accomplishes little. It's stupid to renew the ban. But it's not too bright to get our undergarments in a wad about its renewal.

    Kerry/Edwards will do worse.

    Regards.
     
  6. GeneC

    GeneC member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Messages:
    388
    http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/faqs/?page=awb


    I'd say read up on it and glean your own opinion. If this was just a willy nilly stand alone bill, I'd be totally against it, but the AWB is part of a whole package that addresses gang violence and crime in this Country, which we all know is an epidemic. Part of that package also required background checks at purchasing, which I completely agree with. The fact is , the AWB will only ban FUTURE manufacture/import of AK-47, M-16, Mac 10/11, Tec-9, Uzi,etc type weapons with high cap (50 or more) mags and is easily concealed. Who here needs a folding stock, threaded barrel and bayonet lug? Any AR existing now will NOT be banned. The entire LEO community are for it and I think they should take precedence since they have to deal with it on a daily basis. Just like with most anything else, if you're an upstanding citizen and don't commit any crimes, you have nothing to fear. Remember, Tommyguns were banned, but they didn't 'come after out guns'. Fact is certain guns have been banned for most of the last Century( I.E zip guns and Saturday night specials). Btw, even if the AWB sunsets, there's bills in place to shift to the State level. Seven States already have a AWB in place.
     
  7. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    As much as I have argued that this is the wrong election to make a protest vote, I will do exactly that if the ban is signed by GWB. I expect it to sunset and I will be holding the Republican party responsible if it does not.

    GeneC - I hope that is sarcasm. If not, I'd advise you to read up on the "good first step" comments and take a look at recent legislation to see what the proposed "second step" was and then reevaluate whether you think they will be coming after more guns in the future.

    Well if you agree with that, you will be pleased to know that the Brady Bill is actually separate from the semi-auto ban and will not expire with that ban as it is totally separate and not part of a "total" package.

    You are in error here. The semi-auto ban banned many more weapons besides the 19 listed and it also banned any detachable magazine with a capacity of larger than 10 rounds.


    Here is a good site to learn exactly what the 1994 ban accomplished:
    http://www.ont.com/users/kolya/

    Come back and tell me if you don't think the Bradys left out a few details of relevance in their link.
     
  8. GeneC

    GeneC member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Messages:
    388
  9. Muzzleflash

    Muzzleflash member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    318
    Silencers? Why shouldn't we be able to shoot a gun in silence.

    50 round magazines? Got a good reason why I shouldn't have them?

    Folding stocks? Ok. Firing an "assualt rifle" with the stock folded is a recipe for sloppy firing. But it's very useful for transport.
     
  10. boofus

    boofus Guest

    I paid good money and jumped through plenty of hoops for my NFA registered machinegun and suppressor. I don't want some feel good law that does absolutely nothing to curb crime preventing me from getting new reliable magazines for it. Do you know how hard it is to find mags for some of these guns? and if you do find mags, get ready to pay a huge premium on them.

    I also want to use my suppressor on any damn gun I want, I paid the taxes, jumped through the hoops, so brady and feinstein should get bent and quit trying to dictate what I can and can't do with my own property.

    Rest assured if a fellow gunowner works to get the guns I'm interested in banned, I will do all in my power to make sure their over/unders, SxS, and revolvers and whatever are banned too.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 17, 2004
  11. GeneC

    GeneC member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Messages:
    388
    Sure, if you can't hit a deer in less than 10 shots, you certainly don't need 40 more. Give a good reason why you do .


    You ARE able to shoot with suppressor( no such thing as a silencer) and have the threaded barrel(as long as you're not a convicted felon or mental case), this is about not letting ALL guns have them.


    Folding stocks useful for transport? More useful for concealment. If you have a transport issue for a hunting rifle, you do have an issue.

    Boofus, if you're registered to own, you CAN also buy mags and suppress any dang gun you want and the AWB won't effect you at all.
     
  12. Ky Larry

    Ky Larry Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Messages:
    3,526
    Location:
    Ky
    The AWB is a political club that will be used against Pres. Bush no matter what happens. If an extension bill reaches his desk, it will be a campaign issue in Nov. If he signs it, the conservatives will call him a sell out. If he vetoes it, the liberal press will accuse him of putting more "evil assualt weapons" back on the street. Our best hope for the death of the AWB is for it to stay bottled up in committe until it expires. Make sure you let your Congress Critters know you views on this issue.
     
  13. boofus

    boofus Guest

    Show me the part of the 2nd Amendment that talks about shooting deer? Especially the part that requires you take a deer down in fewer than 10 shots.

    You can't put a thread-on suppressor on a post-ban gun that doesn't have threads. Plus the suppressor counts as a flash-hider. This is the stupidity of the AWB.

    These items are already HIGHLY regulated by the 1934 NFA and the penalties are far more severe than anything in the crime bill.

    If you want to base it on deer-hunting NEEDS, who needs a modern firearm at all? According to you, everything should be banned except black powder muzzle loaders and bows and arrows. In the 1700s no one had problems killing deer with these weapons.
     
  14. boofus

    boofus Guest

    Absolutely incorrect. Unless you are a FFL you can not buy newly manufactured 'evil' magazines, you have to settle for the 10+ year old surplus mags that may or may not work. Also you get screwed by paying 3 to 4 times what it would cost to buy a newly manufactured post-ban magazine. Some guns you simply can not find mags for. How many HTA AK22 magazines have you seen for sale? Without mags the AK22 is a $6000 piece of junk. The problem could be remedied with a new $10 piece of metal with a spring in it, but not while the awb is infringing your right to buy/build a new one.

    You can not put a suppressor on a post-ban AR15 or AK rifle because it counts as a flash-hider. Plus lack of threads on the barrel could be a problem too. You could get a pre-ban rifle to put it on, but then again you get screwed and pay 2-3 times more for a used 10 year old rifle simply because of some stupid date on a calendar.
     
  15. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    ]

    GeneC, if you would do me the courtesy of reading the link I provided, I think you would realize the foolishness of that question. However, since you asked...

    What would be the use for cars that exceed the speed limit, $200 sneakers, or high-speed internet connections when you can get by just fine with less?

    In the society I would like to live in, I wouldn't have to justify to government why I needed something. Government would have to justify to me why I shouldn't have something - something that they have not been able to do with the semi-auto ban. On the contrary, the National Institue of JKustice released a report stating:

    <i>"...other analyses using a variety of national and local data sources found no clear ban effects on certain types of murders that were thought to be more closely associated with the rapid-fire features of assault weapons and other semiautomatics equipped with large capacity magazines. The ban did not produce declines in the average number of victims per incident of gun murder or gun murder victims with multiple wounds...

    ...There were several reasons to expect, at best, a modest ban effect on criminal gun injuries and deaths. First, studies before the ban generally found that between less than 1 and 8 percent of gun crimes involved assault weapons, depending on the specific definition and data source used...

    ...The public safety benefits of the 1994 ban have not yet been demonstrated."


    But since you asked, I'll explain why I use all of those things.

    First of all, the prohibition on folding stocks also effects collapsible stocks but has no effect on the overall length of the rifle. It is perfectly legal for me to have a bullpup fixed stock semi-automatic rifle that is only 26" long (and thus "easily" concealable by the tortured logic of the Brady Campaign); but it is illegal for me to have a rifle where the stock in the collapsed position is 9" longer. Does that make any sense? In the meantime, that collapsible stock gives me the advantage of adjusting the stock for different sized users (women or children, make it a little longer for prone, a little shorter for heavy coats). I can now use one rifle instead of 3 or 4.

    Threaded barrel? Lets me add any range of barrel accessories like muzzle brakes and sound suppressors to the gun with minimum fuss. All of these are legal, yet the law now says that you can't easily add them. This makes sense why?

    50rd mags? First of all, the law bans any mags over TEN rounds. Second, I have been in classes where we fired 800 rounds through a rifle in a single day. That is the difference between reloading your mags 80 times and less than 20 times - that is a lot of extra instruction and range time.

    So despite the fact I have held a TS/SCI clearance and been a good upstanding citizen with not even a traffic ticket in ten years, I am told that I cannot own something. Even worse, I am told I cannot own that after government admits that the it cannot even tell if the law is achieving its objective. And yet you seem to feel this is a good law?

    If THAT is the form of government the Republican party envisions, they can try and get there without me.
     
  16. Fly320s

    Fly320s Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,828
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    Need is not a factor to be used to decide what a person should own. We are free people who make our own decisions about what is right for us. If you think a person must show "a need" to own an object, then I suggest you try China as a country of residence.

    Each NFA item (suppressor, short-barrelled rifle/shotgun, or machine gun) must be independently registered and have the tax-stamp paid. The threaded barrels are prohibited on firearms affected by the 1994 Clinton gun ban.

    Folding stocks are useful for transport. Not everyone owns a full-size SUV to transport their three-foot long rifle. Also, a telescoping stock, such as those available on some AR15s, allow the user to adjust the length of rifle to his personal tastes. Finally, the BATFE has mandated a minimum overall length for long guns (rifles & shotguns), so a folding stock most definitely helps to make a rifle's lenth more transportable.

    The NFA item is the registered part, not the owner. Therefore, each item must be registered with the BATFE and the $200 tax must be paid for each item, sometimes twice.

    The 1994 Clinton gun ban does not have a provision for allowing normal capacity mags (greater that 10 rounds) to be newly manufactured and sold to people who have NFA items. Even though Boofus has a properly registered NFA weapon, he is still not allowed to buy newly manufactured normal capacity magazines.

    edited for typos
     
  17. Cool Hand Luke 22:36

    Cool Hand Luke 22:36 member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,291
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    GeneC:

    You don't have the right to demand an explaination as to why somebody else chooses to exercise a right purportedly guaranteed under our Constitution. People who advocate such a restriction must explain why it should be instituted.

    Any restriction on a fundamental right, whether specifically enumerated in the Constitution or not, must pass strict scrutiny at the Supreme Court. That means that the restriction must serve an overwhelming public good that cannot be met in any other way.

    At this time, give me one good reason as to why magazine capacity for semi-auto rifles must be limited to 10 rounds.

    Be specific in citing your sources, and show a clearly defined benefit to this restriction on the 2nd Amendment.

    At this time, cite the crime data from an objective source (FBI, CDC etc.) showing how many serious crimes were committed annually with the specific semi-auto rifles banned under the AWB, and at this time cite a source showing that crimes committed with these rifles have decreased, and that such a decrease, if any, is attributal to the AWB.

    I'll wait for your well documented response.
     
  18. Molon Labe

    Molon Labe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,700
    Location:
    SW Ohio
    If the AWB is renewed I will vote for the Libertarian Party or Constitution Party.

    If the AWB sunsets I will vote for the Libertarian Party or Constitution Party.

    I am through with the Republican Party… :fire:
     
  19. Harve Curry

    Harve Curry Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,756
    Location:
    Black Range of New Mexico
    Gene C ,

    With all due respect. Read more history. Read books about the founding fathers. Read recent well researched books about the right to keep and bear arms. Your 2nd Amendment definition is in need of a dictionary.
    I recommend The Second Amendment Primer by Les Adams, Paladium Press.
     
  20. Chris Rhines

    Chris Rhines Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,773
    Location:
    Potomac, Maryland - Behind enemy lines!!
    *chuckle*

    Why does it not surprise me the GeneC is a gun control advocate?

    - Chris
     
  21. Jeff Timm

    Jeff Timm Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    933
    Location:
    St. Augustine, FL
    GeneC asked the obvious questions: 1."Sure, if you can't hit a deer in less than 10 shots, you certainly don't need 40 more. Give a good reason why you do ."

    2. "You ARE able to shoot with suppressor( no such thing as a silencer) and have the threaded barrel(as long as you're not a convicted felon or mental case), this is about not letting ALL guns have them."


    3. "Folding stocks useful for transport? More useful for concealment. If you have a transport issue for a hunting rifle, you do have an issue."

    1. Dog packs, self defense from same. Hunting has whole different regulations.
    I also note home invasions by large groups of Neo-Communist Democrats accross the border in GA. Unfortunately, FL is effectively denied defense against the Democrat murder gangs.

    2. Noise complaints about the NATURE of the noise from Ranges are an excuse to close them. Therefore suppressors might be required by the local range rules in the immediate future.

    3. Fact remains, guns and gun cases are a stand-out target for theives. Folding stocks allow the transport of rifles in inconspicouous legal containers.

    Geoff
    Who is taking the bait. :cool:
     
  22. cosmonick

    cosmonick Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2003
    Messages:
    124
    Location:
    Indiana
    GeneC,

    If you actually read materials written by the men that framed the constitution and the 2nd Amendment, you'd see that they had a very different view than what you do. They would have encouraged us to own the very things that you are saying have no/little value.

    The whole point is that the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting or sporting. It was put in place to keep the people of this country from becoming subjects.

    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in Government." -- Thomas Jefferson

    ''Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself.'' --George Washington

    Mo
     
  23. fix

    fix Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Messages:
    1,592
    Location:
    Wonderful Northeast Georgia
    Wow, it's nice to finally meet one. I've heard about them for a while now, but never actually ran across one. Interesting, but at the same time...scary. Looks like GeneC would rather hang alone than go to the gallows with the rest of us.

    Tamara usually comes along to post a quick one liner at this point. Something about being screwed.
     
  24. TimH

    TimH Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    766
    Location:
    upstate NY
    I would rather be mad a tBush for renewal of the AWB than mad a Kerry for gun registration or gun confiscation
     
  25. GeneC

    GeneC member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Messages:
    388
    All Y'all can read more history, the fact remains, like it or not, the AWB is only a PART of a comprehensive bill that addresses gang violence and crime in this Country and now we're at war. Y'all act like this is some kind of Sunday picnic by the lake. I'm a registered Republican and hold a CCW here in FL and own a Ak-47, with a 100 rd drum and several 30 rd mags and have a pistol grip on my 12ga shotgun and I feel confident that if my Congress and my President feels it necessary to halt FUTURE production/import of "assault weapons", I'm gonna back 'em 100%, like a good American should and I also feel confident I'll continue to own my weapons for the rest of my life, so long as I don't commit any felonies.


    BR, your link is misleading, for one all it talks about is the m-16, not the other 16 assault weapons. What about the Mac 10 or the tec 9? In another it shows a picture of an m-16 and says 'this is legal, but it has a pistol grip, so therefore, it's not.


    I think y'all just don't like anyone opposing your own personal opinions. I don't think you have a good view of the overall picture. THe awb is NOT the end of the world. I believe if we gun owners would agree that there' s gang problems and gun problems and work with it, we'd be able to control it better.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page