So You Thought The AW Ban Would...

[SteyrAUG]

quietly sunset? Think again.

http://www.senate.gov/~feinstein/leg_priorities_108.htm

Gun Violence and Public Safety:


Assault Weapons Ban - Reauthorizes and strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, which prohibited the manufacture and sale of 19 types of military-style assault weapons. (To be introduced this Winter).


Military Sniper Weapon Regulation Act - Curbs the sales of the powerful .50-caliber military sniper rifles in order to make it more difficult for terrorists, doomsday cults and criminals from obtaining these deadly weapons. (To be introduced February 2003).

You have 1 shoppping year left.

 

[Zundfolge]

These are just pet projects of Dianne Feinstein.

They are not yet the law of the land and I doubt they will be (at least not anything close to the form they are in now).


Ms. Feinstein has lost significantly more battles then she's won and I doubt she'll win here.


I'm actualy pretty optimistic about the AWB sunsetting (but maybe I'm just an idiot )

 

[SteyrAUG]

I'm just showing you guys the ghost of christmas future.

I'd be pessimistic, but it probably wouldn't work.

 

[Schuey2002]

It's a good thing that the Democrats lost the midterm elections or this baby would have a greater chance of passing..

 

[larry_minn]

While I hope it will end I just bought another standard mag for G19 and have bid on other mags. I hope I am wrong and common sense will prevail.

 

[SquirrelNuts]

larry,

see http://home.att.net/~mpthole/reading/inmemory.htm

-SquirrelNuts

 

[El Tejon]

Steyr, cheer up, good incentive to write your Congresscritters.

 

[AK103K]

When has a law, especially and bad one, ever gone away? About the only think I can think of that was repealed was prohibition. I'm still waiting for the machine gun ban to be repealed. They WILL NOT allow the AWB to sunset, so get used to it. Perhaps the way to work all this out is the same way as prohibition, we all openly disobey the ban so it HAS to be repealed. Seems if they were willing to listen to a lot of drunks a bunch of well armed individuals should be a cinch, eh?

 

[Kharn]

AK103K: The MG ban was part of the Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA), which repealed large parts of the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA). The GCA required things like signing the dealer's bound book for every single round of ammunition purchased and other such nonsense; the FOPA repealed it all, at the cost of the MG ban being snuck in at the last second.

Kharn

 

[AK103K]

Kharn,
But they "didnt" repeal the GCA68 in whole, just feed us some chips and stole the case of beer. Just more smoke and mirrors. I really dont think they will repeal anything, or let anything sunset, not what we would call it anyways. History shows, by all the laws still on the books, that their "rules" will not go away. Once there, no matter how old, obsolete, and unused, can always be called on to screw you, if noting else is available or seemingly applicable.

 

[Hawkeye755]

I can almost guarentee that the AW ban will sunset next year.

Why????

Because I just purchased a pre ban Colt for a great price. Since the only luck I have is bad, the ban has to sunset and my new gun will be worth about half as much as I paid for it.

 

[El Tejon]

Hawkeye, allow me to be first to thank you for your sacrifice.

Now, even though the snow is melting off, my streets are still salty and sandy. Can you please wash your car so it will rain?

 

[Hawkeye755]

Too late Tejon....washed it yesterday

and now, its snowing here.

:banghead:

 

[TechBrute]

If you think it's going to sunset because we are in a Repulican-run congress, just remember that it was a Republican that introduced it in the first place.

These people are politicians. They will do whatever they think will get them the most votes next election. Our job is to make the sunset supporters ACTUALLY GET THE MOST VOTES!!

 

[beckrodgers]

No we did not think or believe any such thing. Its all most time to start doing somethig about it .I dont mean voting either.Thats what kills me bout all this I dont care enemy more what is proposed or written to law in any state bout GUNs firearms children safety etc. These people or trechorus evil self serving ego maniacs thst think they cannot be dealt with. So we are terroist anti govt for views like this. I lerned a long time back what 50 to60 detrmined folks can acomplish. If more happens to The gun owners of theUS pity pity pity us WE deserve it. Long live the Patriot act and Patriot Act II. Really sick of it. Been keeping up with this crap for 12 years on a daily basis. Any of us who think legislating our way out of this are useful fools. It is over. thanks

 

[4v50 Gary]

If Al Qaeda hits us again, there'll be another rush for firearms and people will again be skeptical of the gun control issue. Self defense first.

 

[Zundfolge]

If you think it's going to sunset because we are in a Repulican-run congress, just remember that it was a Republican that introduced it in the first place.

Good point, however at the time Democrats were winning with the gun control issue. Since 9/11 (hell, even before that) Democrats have seen their stance on gun control cost them elections (frankly I think it's one of the main reasons we aren't talking about President Gore).

The Republicans seem to like to give away their beliefs to show Democrats they are not partisan ... however less Democrats are asking for gun control now.

 

[Nightfall]

I think it's easy to be optimistic about our chances of the AWB sunsetting right now. Things are relatively quiet about this, and the general public hasn't been stirred up and roused by antigun propaganda or babbling politicians. My guess is that we won't see the pressure really hit until we get a bit closer to decision day, and a sudden influx of misguided emotion has a bigger chance of swaying votes for ‘doing the right thing for the children' :. I have a sincere hope that this time America's firearms owners will get off their asses and use the same tools that are normally the weapon of war protesters and gun grabbers. I'd love (and would most certainly join) a smart, well organized rally/march/etc in Washington close to d-day for the AWB. Having half a million or more people yelling in support of the 2nd Amendment and the sunset of the AWB would be a lot more food for thought to weak minded political weasels than a few well written letters. Not that we should stop writing.

 

[gun-fucious]

seen this?:

The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban
A Public Opinion Nightmare
Ryan VanOrden

On September 13th 1994, HR4296, the so-called Assault
Weapon's Ban, was signed into law. Under the guise of reducing
crime, it outlawed future manufacture and importation of
several specific firearms, and arbitrarily limited choice
features of all future firearms eligible for sale in the
United States. Proponents of the bill touted military
look-alike rifles as "dangerous weapons of mass destruction"
in an effort to win public support for an outright ban on such
"evil" features as bayonet lugs, folding stocks, and curved
magazines.

While they may have succeeded in convincing a narrow majority
of legislators to vote in favor of the ban, they did not
succeed in convincing the American public, especially not
those who even pretended to know anything about firearms.
The resulting public outcry among the gun-owning community of
the United States galvanized the gun lobby, and has
contributed to the outcomes of every subsequent election.
Ironically, this law may prove to be the beginning of a marked
trend that unifies gun owners as a more homogenous voting
block than ever before.

In a somewhat twisted display of constitutional irony, the
Assault Weapons Ban contains a ten-year sunset clause. Unless
renewed by a subsequent act of Congress, the law will simply
disappear on September 14th of 2004. Weapons and accessories
that have been illegal for the last ten years will once again
appear new on shelves around the country.

In this essay we will examine the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban,
its effects on public opinion and the following elections, and
demonstrate that a renewal of the ban in September of 2004
would be political suicide for many candidates hoping for
reelection in November.


http://www.awbansunset.com/essay_vanorden1.html

 

[Kharn]

I stopped reading it at:

The law specifically names 19 different firearms as patently illegal, and specifies that three or more of the following features present on a single firearm constitutes an assault weapon.

A folding or telescoping stock
A pistol grip
A bayonet mount
A flash suppressor, or threads to attach one (a flash suppressor reduces the amount of flash that the rifle shot makes. It is the small birdcage-like item on the muzzle of the rifle)
Muzzle capable of acting as a grenade launcher.
Magazine capacity over 10 rounds

The law says if you have a detachable magazine, you can only have one of the other features. If you dont have the detachable magazine, you can have as many of the others as you want. Its really annoying when pro-gun sites get it wrong.

Kharn

 

[UnknownSailor]

Not to mention getting the definition of a flash supressor wrong.

 

[ahadams]

folks, neither we nor the antis were ever concerned about drive by bayonettings, regardless of what the mindless media said at the time...it was just a ploy for leverage that the antis thought would get them some concessions and when it didin't they didn't know what else to do.

Feinstein's bill filings remind me of Major Owens from NYC who when he was a congressman managed to file a bill repealing the 2nd Ammendment at the beginning of every single legislative session. No kidding (you may substitute any word you feel appropriate for "kidding")! The filing did nothing except convince everyone else in the house that he was a non-player who preferred to sacrifice his credibility with fellow legislators for points with his constituents.

Expect a fight on the sunset of the so-called AW ban, but if we stand on the toes of our reps and senators it *WILL* sunset. The one thing the original writers did not count on was our folks retaking control of the gov't.

y'all should try living inside the DC beltway for a decade or so - that's NOTHING compared to some of the stuff the socialists pull!

 

[Jeff Thomas]

I think we could cut VanOrden a little slack on his essay.

(a flash suppressor reduces the amount of flash that the rifle shot makes. It is the small birdcage-like item on the muzzle of the rifle)

http://www.nraila.org/FirearmsGlossary.asp

FLASH HIDER/FLASH SUPPRESSOR: A muzzle attachment intended to reduce visible muzzle flash caused by the burning propellant.

With respect, IMHO VanOrden got his points across with a reasonable amount of detail for a general audience. He assumed a detachable mag, and he didn't get into Vortex suppressors, etc. Writing for large audiences is not easy.

The rest of the essay was interesting ... and even cites a familiar source to most of us -- the TheFiringLine.Com.

I appreciated the link, the essay and the thread. Thanks.

Regards from TX

 

[OF]

The result was the bill passing by the narrowest of margins, with a vote count of 216 for the bill, 214 against and with 3 abstaining; it was numbered as one of the narrowest victories in legislative history. [8] Gun owners, divided by political infighting between weekend hunters (who see no need for assault weapons) and strict constitutionalists (who obviously do) were unable to effectively rally together for a common cause.

An important paragraph.

A good article.

- Gabe

 

[Jack19]

These are just pet projects of Dianne Feinstein.

And, once upon a time, the GCA was someone's pet project, the NFA was someone's pet project, the 89 Ban was someone's pet project, then the 94 Ban was someone's pet project.

Sure, ignore Dianne Fienstein; she'll never get anything more restrictive passed. Go back to sleep, no need to do anything. Not to worry, your government will prevent anything that restricts your Constitutional rights from ever passing.

Won't they?

SteyrAUG is right.