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

we've discussed death of AWB and harsher AWB

Discussion in 'Legal' started by MJRW, Aug 11, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MJRW

    MJRW Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,009
    Location:
    Virginia
    But why do I not see anyone discussing the idea of an AWB that is slightly less restrictive than the current one? It seems if the DiFi can't push renewal of current AWB through, that she may compromise just to get ANYTHING through. I haven't seen anyone propose this as a possibility, have I just missed the discussion?
     
  2. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    You don't really expect the leftist extremists to offer a compromise, do you? If they thought they could get away with it, they'd simply repeal the Second Amendment and issue orders that all firearms in civilian hands must be turned in within 48 hours.
     
  3. Cortland

    Cortland Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Messages:
    902
    Location:
    Carrollton, VA
    What's to compromise? Bump the feature count from two to three? The version of the renewal in the House already is a compromise: it doesn't include the magazine ban. What else could they compromise on the get the House to pass it???
     
  4. Pinned&Recessed

    Pinned&Recessed Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    214
    Location:
    Hicks Airfield, TX
    Here's my version of a watered down AWB:

    If a weapon is sold in a box that says "Assault Weapon" it is an assault weapon regardless of configuration. Conversely, if the box does not say "Assault Weapon" on it anywhere, it is not an AW regardless of configuration.

    I would alter the NFA definition of Machine Guns in a similar way. The only way a gun could be a Machine Gun is if the box it comes in says "Machine Gun", otherwise it is not defined as a machine gun, no matter how many rounds it fires per trigger pull. There, I just nullified the NFA and 922 (o) in one fell swoop.
     
  5. rick_reno

    rick_reno member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,027
    Pinned&Recessed, I see a future in Washington for you.
     
  6. reagansquad

    reagansquad Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    386
  7. TooTaxed

    TooTaxed Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    1,255
    Location:
    Columbus, Georgia
    I still expect Feinstein & Co to tack a full AWB or extension as an amendment onto a budget bill or some other unrelated bill most congressmen will want to pass...
     
  8. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,085
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    Quick, someone nominate Pinned&Recessed for Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court!
     
  9. ny32182

    ny32182 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Messages:
    5,733
    Location:
    Clemson, SC
    I thought they recently passed a rule that would keep this from happening: All amendments must be relevant to the legislation at hand. They were able to shoot down the immunity bill with this amendment because it was on the "same topic" of firearms law?

    Or did I not really hear that, and just make it up?
     
  10. schizrade

    schizrade Guest

    Right. Majority Leader Frist enstated this parliamentary rule. Unsaid and never followed before, AFAIK it is now the indefinate rule in the Senate.
     
  11. Correia

    Correia Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    10,648
    Location:
    SLC
    Plus they are running out of time. How many days left after they get back from recess?
     
  12. Pinned&Recessed

    Pinned&Recessed Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    214
    Location:
    Hicks Airfield, TX
    IIRC, they have 5 days after they return until the ban sunsets.
     
  13. Brett Bellmore

    Brett Bellmore Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    979
    Location:
    Capac, Michigan
    Until he feels like violating it, anyway. Remember that all those nasty amendments to the Lawful Commerce act were only permitted because the Republican Senate leadership conspired with the Democrats to open the bill to amendment after Republicans had won a vote barring amendments! Amd he, then too, had the power to declare those amendments off subject, and didn't.

    If the ban passes, it will only be because the Republican leadership WANTS it to pass. And if they want it to pass, no rule is going to stop it, because the rules only get enforced when the leadership wants them to be.
     
  14. HankB

    HankB Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    5,226
    Location:
    Central Texas
    A cogent comment - with a GOP house, a GOP senate, and a GOP president, any new or renewed ban will be a GOP ban.

    If that happens, the GOP will not be receiving any votes from my household.
     
  15. alan

    alan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,598
    Location:
    sowest pa.
    As to "compromise" with DIFI, giving her something, in the words of an old Irish acquaintance of mine, THE BACK OF ME HAND TO HER.

    Seems appropriate.

    Re other aspects, I've long been curious as to the following. Our side seems always tpo be playing "catch-up", that is to say, blocking the proposals of the anti's or worse yet, seeking to "compromise" with them.

    When the hell are we going to become proactive, rather than reactive? Legislation has been repealed before, for god's sake, even amendments to the constitution have been undone, remember Prohibition?
     
  16. ctdonath

    ctdonath Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    Cumming GA
    Remember: the AWB passed ONLY because of a REPUBLICAN - Bob Dole.
     
  17. hillbilly

    hillbilly Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,166
    Location:
    Iowa
    ctdonath, if the only reason the AWB passed was Republican Bob Dole, then what do you make of then Vice President Al Gore's tie-breaking vote to put the AWB over the top in the US Senate?

    hillbilly
     
  18. Harry Tuttle

    Harry Tuttle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Messages:
    3,093
    the WDC gun controlers have no juice

    in 2000 they had a huge MMM push with 100,000 folkes at a Washington DC elect Al Gore rally
    Al lost.
    This year they had 1000 people and a pink winnebago

    The MMM national barely filled the small ballroom at the Sheraton with Clinton as the speaker

    Gun control is a third rail

    Kerry knows it
    Bush knows it
     
  19. Brett Bellmore

    Brett Bellmore Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    979
    Location:
    Capac, Michigan
    Hillbilly, he's perfectly correct about that; Several weeks before the vote on the AWB, Dole arranged for a "unanimous consent agreement"* which prohibited any filibuster of the ban. Knowing that a filibuster was our only chance of stopping it.

    Without Dole's action, Gore never would have gotten the chance to cast that tie breaking vote.

    Dole was also responsible for the Brady bill becoming law; We'd filibustered it to death, and he got together with the Democratic leadership, snuck into town during a break, and the three of them voted "unanimously" to bring the bill back.

    Dole was actually quite proud about betraying us on these bills, it's not like he denies having done it. He brags about it.
     
  20. VaniB.

    VaniB. member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Messages:
    170
    Location:
    TX
    A less restrictive ban....nawww. Expect FULL FORCE, CATEGORY STRENGTH 4! You don't think that a congressman who would vote for a new AWB to begin with, is going to refuse to do so just because another 37 ugly rifles were added to the list?

    Well, thank goodness my previous concerns about this recess becoming a pressure cooker for renewal of the AWB has proved unfounded. For the last two weeks now the "sunset" has remained a non-issue with whatever news sources that have TRIED to bring it up to see if it would stick. This far into the game now, it is clear that Pres BUSH has chosen his course and is sticking to it, and they can't fess up enough public outcry to bend him. Bill Frist and that jack-ass in the House are his commanders, and are following the course as ordererd by him to sail into the sunset. THE BAN IS DEAD!!!

    BUT.....Some how, some way, a worse ban is coming after the election. Bush put his foot in his mouth by promising to sign one, and you know an important bill with an AWB amendment is going to make it to his desk eventually. And with Kerry; no need to speculate....expect the worst!
     
  21. alan

    alan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,598
    Location:
    sowest pa.
    Brett Bellmore observed:

    Hillbilly, he's perfectly correct about that; Several weeks before the vote on the AWB, Dole arranged for a "unanimous consent agreement"* which prohibited any filibuster of the ban. Knowing that a filibuster was our only chance of stopping it.

    Without Dole's action, Gore never would have gotten the chance to cast that tie breaking vote.

    Dole was also responsible for the Brady bill becoming law; We'd filibustered it to death, and he got together with the Democratic leadership, snuck into town during a break, and the three of them voted "unanimously" to bring the bill back.

    Dole was actually quite proud about betraying us on these bills, it's not like he denies having done it. He brags about it.

    While today's it's merely of historical value, the UNANIMOUS CONSENT that Dole arranged, to bring The Brady Bill back to life was accomplished in the wee hours, in the presence of fewer than a dozen senators. As I recall, it was quite a few less than a dozen members of one of the worlds great deliberative bodies, The United States Senate, as they seemingly like to be known. Re the antics of others, still there, it is worthy of rememberance.
     
  22. ctdonath

    ctdonath Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    Cumming GA
    hillbilly: there would not have been a tie for Gore to break had Dole not voted for it. Apparently Dole was the one responsible for the 10-year sunset: he insisted on its addition, else he would have voted against the ban. Gore's vote was a given; Dole cast the deciding vote.
     
  23. Chatelaine

    Chatelaine Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1
    Location:
    Colorado high country
    AWB question

    Hi Y'all,
    This might not be the proper forum for my question, but it seems like a good place to start..:confused:

    I recently fell heir to a Ruger Mini-14. Folding stock, flash guard, the works.
    I was thinking of selling it and when I took it to a local hunting supply store,
    the clerk/owner warned me that if it was manufactured after the "Assault Weapon Ban", it was illegal to even own the thing, much less try to sell it. I have the serial number but I haven't got a clue as to how to use that number to determine whrn the rifle was made.

    Any help will be greatly appreciated. I don't get to the webb very often so if any one wants to reply to my regular e-mail addy, that is fine.

    Chatelaine@drewminter.com



    Thanks for your patience,
     
  24. jobu07

    jobu07 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,980
    Location:
    Pike County, PA
    Chatelaine, your post would probably be more appropriate in the rifle forum, but that's ok. FIrst off, welcome to the high road! :) Second, you can go to ruger's website, i think it's ruger.com and they have a page where you cna check your serial number against thier records for the date of manufacture. If it's all factory, you're most likely good to go!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page