Jump to content

- - - - -


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic



    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 2785 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Thompsons of course. All Manufactures and Models.

Posted 12 May 2004 - 01:40 PM

A recent news story at thehill.com quoted Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) as being confident there were enough votes in the House to pass a ban renewal if it came to the floor, and indicated he was considering filing a discharge petition (which requires the support of a simple majority of House members) to force a vote on the bill.

You can view the article here:


While he might be overly optimistic on how the ban would fare in the House, we would be foolish to ignore the possibility of Republican leadership caving on this issue.

We must make it absolutely clear that, while many of us are willing to set aside our disappointment in the fact that Bush has expressed support for renewing the ban in the past, we WILL NOT vote to reelect him if the ban is actually signed into law. Plus, House leadership needs to be reminded of how they gained control in 1994, widely acknowledged as being a direct result of the original ban being passed.

In addition, you can point out the following:

· The government-funded study (conducted under the Clinton administration) on the effects of the ban found no detectable reduction in crime that could be attributed to the ban, as these guns were only rarely used in crime even before the ban.

· The firearms restricted by this ban are nearly identical to non-banned guns, differing only by "minor cosmetic changes" (a catch-phrase used by many anti-gun organizations in the context of complaining about how manufacturers changed their products to comply with the law). They do not fire any faster, nor are they any more powerful than non-banned guns, despite their menacing looks and scary-sounding names.

· The radically anti-gun Violence Policy Center freely admits the expiration of the ban will have no adverse effects, calling the ban "a joke."

Let us send a clear message of how strongly we feel about this issue. Take a few moments to contact the following people, and POLITELY make your opinion known. If possible, please call, as well as fax and mail a letter.

Speaker of the House J. Dennis Hastert
235 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2976
Fax: (202) 225-0697

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay
H-107 The Capitol
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-4000
Fax: (202) 225-5117

House Majority Whip Roy Blunt
H-329 The Capitol
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-0197

House Policy Committee Chairman Christopher Cox
2402 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5611
Fax: (202) 225-9177

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Phone: 202-456-1111
Fax: 202-456-2461

In addition, contact your own representative, and urge him/her to not support a discharge petition on a bill to renew the ban on so-called "assault weapons." You can find the contact information for you representative by entering your zip code on this page:


Please send this to anyone you know who shares your view on this issue.


  • 0

#2 Deputy 89C6

Deputy 89C6

    Long Time Member

  • Regular Group
  • 92 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 May 2004 - 03:43 PM

I have to wonder just what will it take to make the people of this country wake up and realize that life is not as it was 3 years ago. I cannot believe in a time when there are an estimated 100,000,000 people in the world that are commited to the destruction of the United States, and to western culture that the anti gun crowd are still trying to force government to disarm the American people.

We are living in the most dangerous time in our history, and the future of our culture may end up in the hands of the American citizens to defend. I'd truly hate to have to take on an enemy combatant with a golf club or softball bat.

I echo that everyone needs to let their representatives know that especially now in a time when national security is in the hands of every American that any politician that waste public time and monies on silly ass gun legislation should be thrown out of office.

Some people just don't get it.

  • 0

#3 Waffen Und Bier

Waffen Und Bier

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 855 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Like the name says "Guns and beer" (and really hot chicks who like guns and beer).

Posted 12 May 2004 - 03:54 PM

Here's what I sent to the Florida Police Chiefs Association when they asked for support of a ban extention:


The 1994 "assault weapons" ban was an emotionally misguided effort to fight
crime and I do not support an extension of the ban. The law is riddled with
loopholes and doesn't do anything to seriously address violent crime. How do
the lack of folding stocks, pistol grips, bayonet mounts, grenade launching
attachments, flash suppressors, or threaded muzzles effect how a bullet
leaves a gun to do what it was designed to do? They don't. A five round
magazine, a ten round magazine or a thirty round magazine doesn't change the velocity or destructive power of a bullet. A Mini 14 with a folding stock,
pistol grip, threaded muzzle, flash suppressor, bayonet mount, and a high
capacity detachable magazine is just as deadly as a Mini 14 without these
features. How have these laws prevented the criminal misuse of a firearm
whether or not it has one or more of these features?

My heart goes out to the victims of violent crimes, but this country needs
to get serious about dealing severely with violent criminals and stop
punishing law abiding citizens with illogical and poorly conceived gun laws.
It is already against the law to murder, to rape, to rob, to shoot someone,
and for those convicted of felonies to possess firearms. Those laws should
be enforced and the guilty severely punished. The times my officers and I
have had firearms used against us by criminals, it has been with guns other
than "assault weapons", usually stolen, and always in the possession of
people who should not have been out on the streets in the first place.

I believe if you poll your officers, you will find that the truly informed
and objective ones support peoples' right to own firearms. The few rights we
do have are continuously being eroded by those who have a problem with
freedom. I cannot and will not support this measure. For the record, I am
not an NRA member. Thank you.

Respectfully submitted,


As a response, I received:

"Thank you for expressing your opinion on this issue. Exchanges of opinions
and ideas is always valuable and appreciated.

The Board of Directors of FPCA has voted to support the position of the IACP
and many other national law enforcement organizations on this issue,
specifically that although we support the right of the people to keep and
bear arms, that this does not and should not extend to these kinds of
killing weapons. The law is not perfect but we believe that it must be
supported. I am sure if the majority of the membership feels that we should
support the ownership of these weapons, we may reconsider our position as an association."

I'm afraid I'm a lone voice amongst them.

As a side note:

I wonder if his officers possess these "killing weapons" to perform their duties. I'm not an NRA member because I got tired of their leadership's rectal cranial inversion and poor handling of so many issues, but mostly because they continue to treat NFA firearms and their owners as the (pick one) "black sheep, red headed step children, crazy uncles, or non persons" of the gun culture. I had been a member for almost 20 years, but LaPierre's book and Heston's comments convinced me to quit and remain quit.
  • 0

#4 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3815 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 May 2004 - 04:42 PM

Considering the lobbying capabilities of the NRA, what have they actually acomplished for gun owners over the last 30 years? Certainly nothing for NFA owners. Do they spend member donations and dues only on furnishing their D.C. offices?
  • 0