Why I think the AWB was good for gun owners

[sturmruger]

Most of this thread is assuming the Assualt Weapon Ban of 1994 expires. I am not expert, but from all the the reading I have done I believe we have an excellant chance of no further AWB type legislation being passed this year.


There was another thread in this forum concerning Bill Ruger and the company that is named after him. It got me thinking about the whole issue of the AWB of 1994. I was only 16 when the ban went into effect. At that time it didn’t concern me a whole lot. I had plenty of high capacity mags for my 10-22, which at the time was all that really mattered to me.

After the thread about Mr. Ruger selling us all out I started thinking about how the ban has affected me over the last ten years. I came to the conclusion that my gun collection has not suffered at all. All of the rifles that I have on my “plan to purchase†list were still available to me. The only part of the law that has really effected what guns I have chosen to buy would probably be in my pistol collection. What bothered me the most was when I bought a couple Steyr Pistols. There are no official Steyr preban mags for this gun. I had to settle for the 10 round magazines. After the Steyrs I tried to buy pistols that I could find preban mags for. The bottom line is for me this law has been a non-factor.

Do not get me wrong I hate any gun control laws vehemently. I believe we should stubbornly fight the future passage of such liberal legislation. Where I am going with all of this is I think the AWB is a bad law, but I think it has had positive effects politically. What the AWB of 1994 reminds me of is Prohibition. They tried Prohibition for 13 years and found that it didn’t work! I am sure when they repealed Prohibition there were people saying that Prohibition did work, but in the end everyone that was realistic came to the conclusion that it was a waste of time and Taxpayers’ money. Even now 80+ years later no one in their right mind would want to pass laws prohibiting all alcohol mostly because it was tried once and found to not work. I think in ten years society will be able to look back on this legislation and realize that it was not needed, it didn’t reduce crime, and there was no increase in crime when it expired.

It has also been discussed in many of the gun magazines the positive effect this law has had on pistol designs and options. Many manufacturers have made guns that are smaller and easier to conceal since the ban went into effect. There was also rise in popularity of larger calibers. The thinking being that if you could only have ten rounds in your magazine you mine as well have the biggest rounds possible These are all positive effects

In conclusion the AWB is a law that should have never happened. Responsible legislators should have recognized what a waste of time this law would be and killed it. After the 94’ elections many unseated congressman wished they would have listened to the NRA and voted against passage of this bill. Even today we have a possible Presidential Candidate that is saying we don’t need anymore-federal gun laws. (Dean) Although he does believe we should renew the AWB. I think politicians for the next 20 years will think back to this law and realize they don’t want to vote for more gun laws. I am sure there will still be your Clintons and Shumers who will always try to pass more gun laws, but they will be the minority. Middle of the road Republicans, and Democrats will do what they can to stay away from anymore-massive gun control legislation. They all want to get reelected and taking away guns from law-abiding citizens is not going to help that happen. In the future they will probably call this the AWB Lesson I just hope our elected officials remember it.

[bI know that my statements are a little out there. I would appreciate any constructive criticism. Please stay on topic and avoid personal attacks. I do not want to get my thread locked.[/b]

 

[AJ Dual]

Yes, the AWB did more for gun sales than any pro-RKBA activist could ever do.

It pushed the "get it while you can", and the "forbiddin fruit" factors into the stratosphere.

All those crowing articles by anti's stating that the gun industry has had steady declines in the past few years, are competely failing to realize the fever pitch the industry enjoyed during '94, '95, and '96, before things calmed down a bit and gun buyers realized they had adequate post-ban alternatives that were barely different from the pre-'94 rifles, and pre-ban standard capacity mags wouldn't dry up completely for several years.

The biggest thing the antis could have done to reduce gun ownership in the U.S. would be to ignore it. If they had, the increasing urbanization demographics of the U.S. would have continually and naturally pushed gun ownership into an ever increacing minority. It also would have de-emphasized guns as forbidden fruit, and talismans of power to the criminal and the school shooters.

Instead they got the CCW legislation in retaliation by the now fired up gun culture, and CCW will help boost gun ownership in the urban areas in the future.

 

[Sam Adams]

Even now 80+ years later no one in their right mind would want to pass laws prohibiting all alcohol mostly because it was tried once and found to not work.

Which is why a ban on smoking cigarettes is very close to being passed. Your faith in human progress, or at least the sanity of the average voter, is a bit misplaced.

Regarding the AWB - I loath it. However, pre-9/13/94 I owned rather fewer guns than I do now. The guns that I've bought tend toward the rugged, won't-be-inoperable-for-a-few-centuries type, and I've accumulated quite a number of magazines, lots of ammo, plus reloading equipment and lots of components. I'm sure that I'm not alone, not if attendance at gun shows is any indication. In a sense, the ban was good for gun owners, but it will be better if it goes away without any renewal. Because if it doesn't, some nasty hidden provision in a new bill will almost certainly allow the next AWB to be far more comprehensive and far-reaching. The antis learned a couple lessons: don't ever make a ban purely cosmetic again, and don't ever make it temporary again. They are playing for keeps, and we need to do the same.

 

[Cal4D4]

Here in Kali, all the rhetoric leading up to the ban emboldened our legislators to implement the non sunseting laws we got. I am not convinced the rest of you will shake free of it and the Kali model may be held up as the shining path to enlightenment. Sorry.

 

[MeekandMild]

People like Sam Adams and a lot of other THR members are the reason I think that manufacturers like S&W, Colt and Ruger have at times tried to extend notorious rules. The manufacturers know that people will buy sooner and buy more if their source of a good or service is threatened. So they want to threaten but not extinguish their market.

The same sort of thing happened when Freon was banned, during the 1970's "gas crisis", when 3.5 gallon flush toilets were banned, when the manufacture of new machine guns after 1986 was banned. Prices went up and people started to buy sooner and more.

Sometimes I even wonder if Ted Kennedy, Diane Feinstein, Bill Clinton and other baddies might have been supported (under the table) by some of the gun industry for the same reason.

 

[BerettaNut92]

I don't see how gambling freedom on a socialist having an epiphany and removing their HUA's is a good thing

 

[sturmruger]

Sam Adams I agree with you 100% we need to play for keeps. I doubt there will be any other liberal legislation with sunset clauses. Can you imagine how pissed they must be that thier lovely law is going to expire!!

MandM I am a little confused as to what you are talking about. If you think all of the manufacturers support tougher gun laws I would say you are a little off base. They want to make is as easy as possible for the common American to purchase thier product, not harder.


Sorry Skunk you must have misunderstood me. Don't for a second think that I am going to let down my gaurd and not actively lobby my congressmen to let this bill expire. I am going to work my A$$ off to make sure the AWB Sunsets. I don't see any talk of gambling anything. What do you mean??

 

[BerettaNut92]

Sorry Skunk you must have misunderstood me. Don't for a second think that I am going to let down my gaurd and not actively lobby my congressmen to let this bill expire. I am going to work my A$$ off to make sure the AWB Sunsets. I don't see any talk of gambling anything. What do you mean??

I was under the impression that you thought that gambling--putting up the AWB under the chance it MIGHT sunset in 10 years--with the hopes of the statists getting a clue was good for gun owners. My apologies if you meant different. This interweb communication thingy gets confusing

 

[Cal4D4]

At the risk of rudeness, let me respond a little for MeekandMild...

All these bans have brought instant profits for manufacturers during slack periods. A great deal of corporate thinking has been very short term and seems to involve how things look under their watch with little regard for long term goals. Another facet is the complex political perceptions of the gun industry. Think Ruger and statements regarding the public's need for 10+ mags for their product line or S&W's inexplicable position with Bill Clinton. These things were not market driven. Finally, industries like the illicit drug trade supposedly have contributed massive amounts of cash here and abroad to keep their trade illicit. No big profits if trafficing drugs becomes nothing more than shipping lettuce. Gun trade (not necessarily at the manufacturing level) has been rumored in the past to have contributed clandestinely to legislation which has driven up the value of certain pre ban items to astronomical levels. Pre ban machine guns, magazines, "assault rifles", etc. In the '80s I turned down a nice HK 91 for $500 because of the fluted chamber and stuff. What is it worth today?

 

[MeekandMild]

Thankyou Cal4D4. That was very eloquent.

MandM I am a little confused as to what you are talking about. If you think all of the manufacturers support tougher gun laws I would say you are a little off base. They want to make is as easy as possible for the common American to purchase thier product, not harder.

I didn't say ALL! But I suspect more than a few would do so.

In turn, I think that the idea any industry being led by political idealists whose ideas are congruent with those of the consumers might be just the tiniest bit naive. As an example, do you really think the RKBA stance of the movie industry is the same as that of the common moviegoer? Of course not!

I also think that some of the big companies (again S&W, Colt and Ruger come to mind) have historically chosen their market segment to be the same LEO organizations and sportsmen that I regularly see lambasted here as being "anti RKBA" or "apathetic" or "unaware".

But back to my main point, I think that Cal4D4 has summed things up pretty well. I recall an uncle of mine who was a state senator in a small southern state back in the 40's and 50's. When he proposed that liquor be legalized and taxed he was soundly cussed by the preachers but it was the bootleggers who nearly lynched him.

 

[Sam Adams]

MeekandMild

People like Sam Adams and a lot of other THR members are the reason I think that manufacturers like S&W, Colt and Ruger have at times tried to extend notorious rules.

So what should I do, M&M, stop buying guns, ammo, etc. because there is a ban? I bought what I did because I was worried that the next step would be an outright ban on everything, or at least everything except single-shot .22 rimfires. It was not, IMHO, an unreasonable assumption, given the politics of the mid- to late-90's. And where, pray tell, would we be if Gore was elected?

The simple fact is that if the government doesn't want me to have something, especially something historically linked to freedom and liberty, then I want as much as I can haul away. Of course that means that someone's going to make some money off of it - I'm no thief - but that is our system.

And, FYI, I have not bought a single product from S&W since it signed that agreement with the Feds, I've never owned a Colt product, and I haven't bought a Ruger since Senility Bill started raving about 10-round mags being enough for anyone (and the 2 Rugers that I once owned were POS's that I dumped for a more accurate and durable product).

I'm sure that you are going to answer with something to the effect of "that's not what I meant." I'm all ears about what you did mean - and I hope that my assumptions about it were wrong.

 

[hillbilly]

The only positive effect I can even halfway rationalize out of the AWB is that its passage shocked many otherwise complacent gun owners into activism.

For the first time, people got a true, unadulterated look straight down the gullet and into the belly of the anti-gun beast.

And I think a lot of gun owners and gun industry types finally got their clue.

Any one see Shotgun News lately? Olympic Arms (oops, my bad, Armalite) is running a deal so that any Oly Arms rifle you buy now comes with a coupon good for one free flashider when the ban expires.

At least I am pretty sure it was Oly Arms ( I was wrong, it was Armalite).

I saw the SGN ad yesterday and remarked, "Cool, a manufacturer who gets it" and paid more attention to the content of the statement rather than which company was making the statement.

hillbilly

 

[G1FAL]

Any one see Shotgun News lately? Olympic Arms is running a deal so that any Oly Arms rifle you buy now comes with a coupon good for one free flashider when the ban expires.

Its Armalite thats doing that.

Oly might be, too, but I remember seeing the Armalite ads. Dont remember seeing any Oly ads doing the same.

 

[MeekandMild]

So what should I do, M&M, stop buying guns, ammo, etc. because there is a ban?

Oh, I wan't impying that. In fact both my wife and I bought new pistols right after 9/11. But my point was that we tend to react to what we see and we tend to protect our own economic benefit in the same way that some people bought a few extra cans of freon when the freon ban was due to be started or bought a new toilet before the toilet tank ban could be implemented. Its human nature.

 

[MicroBalrog]

Polytechnologies, anyone?

 

[artherd]

The Federal AWB at least was a skirmish in which we lost only relatively FEW freedoms. It cannot be looked upon as any kind of success however.

The CA AW ban, which does not sunset, is a travesty. I cannot buy an AR-15. Of any kind <pre or post federal-ban, it is banned by 'series'>. New or used. Ever. (it has no sunset.)

CA is left with approximately 5 legal semi-automatic detachable-magazine rifles.


I would also argue the up-calibreing and size-shrinking around 10round pistols is a BAD thing, a compromise at best, and not good.

 

[sturmruger]

I couldn't resist bringing this back to the Top. It is intersting to read now that this silly law expired.

 

[Smurfslayer]

philosophically speaking

you may have a point. Remember the immediate aftermath of the passage of the ban was a total wipeout for Congressional Dems in the election... They begrudgingly handed over power to the Repubs and slunk off into irrelevancy. It showed just how much the gun manufacturers will cowtow to gov't agencies at our expense. Even though it was statistically worthless, that same worthlessness showed that the principle of gun control is simply a false premise.

I remember being nonchalant about the ban when it passed, and the days before it... Not that my (at the time MD resident) opinion would've mattered to any of my elected officials, but, I regret not being more assertive about opposing the ban initially. I'm trying to make up for that.

 

[Sam Adams]

Meek & Mild

What say you now, now that the AWB is in the dustbin of history? I'm sure that you're as happy as I am, but what about the commercial effects? I know that there's a bunch of pent up demand for high caps - excuse me, NORMAL capacity mags - and the same for folding or telescoping stocks, etc. Did businesses 10 years ago plot for higher profits in Sept. of '04? I don't really think so. Yes, it was in the temporary short term interest of several companies to have the AWB put in place - but was it really smart for them to have gun control legislation in place, with the promise (by Feinstein, Schumer, et al) of more? I don't think so. I think that they were as blindsided as the rest of us, and most would have gone out of business if more heinous restrictions had been put in place.

Saying that the gun companies wanted the AWB is like saying that the victims of a vampire would be satisfied with letting the vampire only snack on them a little bit once a month - and trusting that gun control wouldn't go too far and eliminate guns altogether is like trusting that the vampire wouldn't get too carried away and drain all of your blood.

Anyway, it is a moot point - and I'm in a GREAT mood today!