we've discussed death of AWB and harsher AWB

[MJRW]

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?

 

[Standing Wolf]

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.

 

[Cortland]

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???

 

[Pinned&Recessed]

What else could they compromise on the get the House to pass it???

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.

 

[rick_reno]

Pinned&Recessed, I see a future in Washington for you.

 

[reagansquad]

eh

 

[TooTaxed]

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...

 

[El Tejon]

Quick, someone nominate Pinned&Recessed for Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court!

 

[ny32182]

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...

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?

 

[schizrade]

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?

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

 

[Correia]

Plus they are running out of time. How many days left after they get back from recess?

 

[Pinned&Recessed]

IIRC, they have 5 days after they return until the ban sunsets.

 

[Brett Bellmore]

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

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.

 

[HankB]

If the ban passes, it will only be because the Republican leadership WANTS it to pass.

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.

 

[alan]

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?

 

[ctdonath]

Remember: the AWB passed ONLY because of a REPUBLICAN - Bob Dole.

 

[hillbilly]

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

 

[Harry Tuttle]

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

 

[Brett Bellmore]

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.

 

[VaniB.]

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!

 

[alan]

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.

 

[ctdonath]

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.

 

[Chatelaine]

AWB question

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

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.

[email protected]



Thanks for your patience,

 

[jobu07]

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!