Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Aw Ban


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#21 catnipman

catnipman

    Regular Member

  • Regular Group
  • 256 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hygiene, Colorado
  • Interests:Tommy guns, what else? Actually, other machine guns too, vegetable gardening, cooking, PCs, woodworking, football, travel, cinema, books, medicine, nutrition, politics, cats, and art.

Posted 14 July 2004 - 11:24 AM

Yes, driveby bayoneting dropped practically to zero in my neighborhood right after the AW bill passed. And now I'm petrified that the carnage will resume. What could our congressmen have possibly been thinking to allow this horror to begin again?
  • 0

#22 Sgt

Sgt

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2047 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eastern TN
  • Interests:Militaria, Chess, Tools, Sherlock Holmes, Printmaking, UFOs, Ghosts, Electronics, Comic Books, Long walks in the rain, with my Savage 1928a1. (just kidding on the last one; it doesn't have to be raining) -- Ralph

Posted 14 July 2004 - 11:34 AM

The grim part of that was, they could technically send a good guy to prison over those stupid laws.
  • 0

#23 Waffen Und Bier

Waffen Und Bier

    Long Time RKI Member

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

Posted 14 July 2004 - 10:27 PM

Got a letter from the Florida chapter of the National Gun Violence Prevention Center (or whatever the heck they are called) today asking me to sign an endorsement to extend the ban. They're gonna get something from me, but it ain't gonna be what they want.
  • 0

#24 Norm

Norm

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2514 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis, TN
  • Interests:Thompsons (of course), Electronics, Physics, History, Mechanics, Collecting License Plates.

Posted 15 July 2004 - 09:47 AM

Waffen,

Return it unsigned, with coat of Vasaline on it! rolleyes.gif

Norm

  • 0

#25 catnipman

catnipman

    Regular Member

  • Regular Group
  • 256 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hygiene, Colorado
  • Interests:Tommy guns, what else? Actually, other machine guns too, vegetable gardening, cooking, PCs, woodworking, football, travel, cinema, books, medicine, nutrition, politics, cats, and art.

Posted 15 July 2004 - 10:54 AM

Even better, if there is a postpaid envelope, tape it to a box with a couple of bricks inside, and mail them the bricks.
  • 0

#26 LIONHART

LIONHART

    Long Time RKI Member

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

Posted 21 July 2004 - 12:00 PM

From AWBanSunset, as received this morning.

With only 8 legislative working days (less, if you take into account the fact that the Senate "doesn't get much done on Fridays and Mondays" due to travel) remaining before the ill-conceived 1994 "assault weapons" ban expires on September 13th, the clock is rapidly running out and we are seeing a crescendo of rabidly anti-gun rhetoric emerging from politicians and editorial pages throughout the country.

Some are quite amusing, such as this little gem from the Salt Lake Tribune...

"The National Rifle Association and other enemies of firearms regulation claim that the existing assault weapons ban is ineffectual and senseless because it only outlaws cosmetic features of certain guns whose action is identical to that of legal hunting rifles. They are largely right."

They then go on to say, " the goal should be to create a new law that not only extends the current ban but strengthens it to accomplish the original intent, which is to ban military-style, semi-automatic weapons that fire many rounds in quick succession."

If the ban is so ineffective, why even bother trying to renew it as-is? But regardless, something doesn't add up here... if the guns restricted by the ban are "identical to legal hunting rifles," what good will expanding the ban to restrict many more guns that are, in fact, even more benign then those currently banned?

The editorial also laments the fact that the "manufacturers can skirt" the ban (by making cosmetic changes to their products).


A California newspaper, the Desert Sun, goes all out with the despicable scare tactics, promising that "a tidal wave of assault weapons will soon legally flood the country unless Congress acts quickly to renew expiring federal legislation."

Apparently, these folks have not been in a gun store (at least not one in a free state) anytime recently. There are racks and racks of brand new rifles that would be considered "assault weapons" by their measure. After September 13th, the only difference is that these rifles will be available with flash reducers, bayonet lugs, and adjustable stocks. So what's the big emergency?

Borrowing copy from the ridiculous website www.stopthenra.com, they take the fear-mongering rhetoric to an even more outrageous level by saying, "in many states, it will be possible to bring concealed TEC-9 assault pistols, loaded with 30 rounds of ammunition, into bars, churches and sports arenas, public schools or universities."

Proving that they do indeed have a sense of humor, they also add, "we believe strongly in the Second Amendment of the Constitution. The right to bears arms is an unalienable right. The right of each and every citizen to protect themselves -- and their families is a precious freedom that we must preserve for all time."


Cleveland's morningjournal.com pulls the ever-popular "deceive people into thinking the ban restricts machine guns" trick out of the playbook by writing, "the sight of Iraqis toting AK-47 assault rifles on the streets of Baghdad is common in the news, and a scary image. Thank goodness America's streets are safe from that kind of firepower, you might be thinking. But the 10-year-old federal ban on assault rifles in the United States is about to expire on Sept. 13."


A news story in The Daily Local, a Pennsylvania newspaper, included the following quote from East Pikeland Police Chief James Franciscus, who supports renewing the ban: "If the ban is lifted, people will be able to purchase FULLY AUTOMATIC weapons, and they will be able to use those automatic weapons." (emphasis added) Once again, we find ourselves wondering whether this person (a police chief!) is truly this ignorant of the law, or is intentionally trying to mislead the public. It's inexcusable either way.

Amusingly, he indicates later in the article that, in his 29 years of law enforcement, he's "never really had a problem here [with 'assault weapons']" (nor are these guns specifically a problem anywhere else, we might add). Yet he's clamoring for this ban on "machine guns" to be renewed.

Looking on the bright side, the propaganda being churned out by these publications only reinforces the righteousness of our position on this issue... they have to resort to this kind of blatant deception in their desperate attempts to rally public support for the ban, while our points are based on fact, logic, and common sense.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Senators Feinstein and Schumer have sent a letter to Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert in support of H.R. 3831, Rep. Mike Castle's bill that extends the "assault weapons" ban for another 10 years. But it appears as though they haven't even read the bill, or have mysteriously dropped their strong objection to "high capacity" magazines once again going into production, as the Castle bill only renews the "assault weapons" portion of the ban and allows the magazine limitation to expire. How could Feinstein and Schumer possibly support a bill that doesn't restrict "killer clips?"

In reality, they are undoubtedly well aware of the fact that the Castle bill doesn't extend the magazine ban, which indicates the level of desperation they've reached at this point to salvage the Schumer-Feinstein legacy-defining AWB. Many more gun owners are directly affected by the magazine ban than the "assault weapons" ban, and presumably the hope is that this concession will result in opposition waning in sufficient numbers so as to secure the votes needed for passage in the House. It could be that simple, that they're willing to trade off the only part of the ban that could in any way be argued as having an actual effect on "firepower" just for the sake of being able to say that they got the "assault weapons" ban renewed.

However, an even more likely scenario is that they are hoping this hail mary pass gains traction in Congress, and that if they can just get this bill moving, the momentum will then allow them to amend the bill with the magazine ban and produce, at a minimum, a renewal of the existing ban.

In other words, they are counting on hundreds of thousands of people who own Glocks, Berettas, and other pistols sold with neutered 10-round magazines to be dumb enough to fall for this bait-and-switch.

But that's just an unsubstantiated theory.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Keep your ears on local talk radio in your area. If the AWB comes up, either as a primary topic of the show, or just as something mentioned by a caller (for example, "...and Bush won't even renew that ban on rapid-fire AK-47s and Uzis..."), take the initiative to call in to the show and set the record straight. The same applies to writing in to the "letters to the editor" section of your local newspaper(s). Points to make include:

· By the anti-gun crowd's own admissions, only "minor cosmetic changes" separate banned guns from non-banned guns.
· Guns covered by the ban were rarely used in crime even before the ban.
· The Clinton-era government-funded study of the ban's effects found it did not demonstrate a public safety benefit.
· These firearms do not fire any faster nor are more powerful than traditional-looking guns (and are much less powerful than most common hunting rifles).
· Despite the near deafening claims that these guns have "no legitimate purpose" and are "only used by criminals and drug dealers," hundreds of thousands of "assault weapon" owners use these infinitely flexible rifles for recreational shooting, small game hunting, protection, plinking, collecting, and formal competition.

If only anti-gun people call in to talk shows and write letters to the opinion page of the newspaper, the public is only getting one side of the story. Do your part to ensure they hear the truth! Just remember to remain calm and respectful, even in the face of the sheer ignorance that anti-gun callers will likely demonstrate. BE the difference!

To be even more prepared, be sure to read through the "About the Ban" pages at www.awbansunset.com.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

We have only a few days remaining before Congress goes away for the August recess. Then, they're back just one week before the ban expires. Look for the intensity and desperate nature of the anti-gun propaganda to increase between now and then. With this relentless barrage, your senators and representative need to hear from you.

Call, fax, and e-mail your elected officials, and urge them to oppose any effort to renew the ban. While we have already lost a vote in the Senate, it is certainly possible that a few Senators could switch their position on this issue and vote against renewal if they hear from enough of their constituents. Obviously, this does not apply to you if you live in California, New York, Massachusetts, or any other state whose Senators are rabidly anti-gun, but it still couldn't hurt to make your opinion known. A filibuster is another possibility... even if your senator(s) voted against renewing the ban, be sure to write and call them to offer your support and appreciation for this. This is also true of the Democrats who voted against the AWB, such as Mary Landrieu, Harry Reid, and Russ Feingold, who are undoubtedly going to be pressured from party higher-ups to support the ban if it comes up again.

On the House side, when contacting your district's representative, be sure to emphasize that it's not just the Conyers/McCarthy attempt to expand the ban to include even more guns (H.R.2038) that you oppose, but also a renewal of the current ban as-is, or even the watered down Castle bill.





  • 0