Rumors of lifting the 10 round and AW ban ?
- Thread starter 2002gti
- Start date
TheBluesMan
Moderator Emeritus
The so-called assault weapon ban will automatically expire this September.
It's not a matter of the ban being lifted by an act of congress. It can only be reinstated by an act of congress.
The members of congress who align themselves against freedom already tried to renew the ban earlier this year. They failed. As it stands now, it looks like the law will pass away on September 14, 2004.
See http://www.awbansunset.com for more information.
It's not a matter of the ban being lifted by an act of congress. It can only be reinstated by an act of congress.
The members of congress who align themselves against freedom already tried to renew the ban earlier this year. They failed. As it stands now, it looks like the law will pass away on September 14, 2004.
See http://www.awbansunset.com for more information.
Taipei Personality
New member
One of President Bush's campaign promises was to sign a renewal of the AWB if it came to his desk, so his presence in the White House has nothing to do with it not being renewed. It's more a function of a marginally pro-gun House.
You're right, raz-o, and I'm continually surprised. For some reason it's not very well publicized in Libertarian circles. If you followed the S. 1805 (aka "the AWB's last chance") voting, this was a pretty big deal.
This thread covers it pretty well:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=67194&highlight=white+house
This thread covers it pretty well:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=67194&highlight=white+house
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Thumper-
Knox's assumption that Bush's request for a clean bill protecting manufacturers from liability signals a reversal from he '03 statement on the AWB is a reach. Reasonable conclusion....but reaching none-the-less.
From what I can tell Bush has been silent on the issue since early '03 when he stated that he'd sign an extension. I think the key political issue is how bad he wants an NRA endorsement vs how much he fears fence sitters jumping to Kerry, should he come out against the sunset.
The smart political move would be to use Hastert and the House to keep it from coming to a vote, from behind the scenes. If the bill sunsets, regardless of open involvement from GW, he probably gets the NRA support.
The smart ethical move is to tell us exactly how he feels about the 2nd in relation to guns that some think are evil. (Don't hold your breath for that one.)
http://www.evervigilant.net/shelton/shelton111303.html
http://www.hillnews.com/news/051204/nra.aspx
Rich
Knox's assumption that Bush's request for a clean bill protecting manufacturers from liability signals a reversal from he '03 statement on the AWB is a reach. Reasonable conclusion....but reaching none-the-less.
From what I can tell Bush has been silent on the issue since early '03 when he stated that he'd sign an extension. I think the key political issue is how bad he wants an NRA endorsement vs how much he fears fence sitters jumping to Kerry, should he come out against the sunset.
The smart political move would be to use Hastert and the House to keep it from coming to a vote, from behind the scenes. If the bill sunsets, regardless of open involvement from GW, he probably gets the NRA support.
The smart ethical move is to tell us exactly how he feels about the 2nd in relation to guns that some think are evil. (Don't hold your breath for that one.)
http://www.evervigilant.net/shelton/shelton111303.html
http://www.hillnews.com/news/051204/nra.aspx
Rich
Thumper,
Asking for a clean lawsuit protection bill is not the same as "efforts to kill" the AWB.
One, just one, attributable quote from W stating that he is against the '94 AWB would be nice, but it seems that all the attributable quotes available are just political weasel-words like "in favor of enforcing existing laws" and "will sign it if it hits my desk" et cetera.
If he'll stand on principle on this one issue, I'll punch his chad with one hand while holding a deep-fried crow drumstick with the other...
Asking for a clean lawsuit protection bill is not the same as "efforts to kill" the AWB.
One, just one, attributable quote from W stating that he is against the '94 AWB would be nice, but it seems that all the attributable quotes available are just political weasel-words like "in favor of enforcing existing laws" and "will sign it if it hits my desk" et cetera.
If he'll stand on principle on this one issue, I'll punch his chad with one hand while holding a deep-fried crow drumstick with the other...
Come on, Tam...you followed that vote as closely as I did. That memo was a slap in the face to the antis.
Is he ambiguous on the AWB? Yeah. But actions DO speak louder than words. A rider on the lawsuit immunity bill was the last chance for the AWB.
How many gun owners support the AWB? The percentage is disheartening, and that's our fault.
BTW, for someone to try to portray a President who supports lawsuit immunity specifically for the gun industry as anti gun is a little strange, right?
Is he ambiguous on the AWB? Yeah. But actions DO speak louder than words. A rider on the lawsuit immunity bill was the last chance for the AWB.
How many gun owners support the AWB? The percentage is disheartening, and that's our fault.
BTW, for someone to try to portray a President who supports lawsuit immunity specifically for the gun industry as anti gun is a little strange, right?
Thumper,
I'm not trying to portray him as "anti-gun", but (as you point out with your 60% statistic) there are varying shades of "pro-gun", too.
Yeah, somebody who's pro-.38-snubby-in-the-pocket and .30-30-levergun-in-the-gunrack is better than someone who's pro-taking-all-my-dang-guns-away; no doubt, there. I want more, though, and I'm going to keep pushing for it.
PS: I see the gun industry lawsuit protection bill as a first step to badly needed wider tort reform. I dream of a day when someone can't sue McDonald's because they spilled coffee in their own lap or Anheuser-Busch because they drove their own Camaro into a tree while blotto...
I'm not trying to portray him as "anti-gun", but (as you point out with your 60% statistic) there are varying shades of "pro-gun", too.
Yeah, somebody who's pro-.38-snubby-in-the-pocket and .30-30-levergun-in-the-gunrack is better than someone who's pro-taking-all-my-dang-guns-away; no doubt, there. I want more, though, and I'm going to keep pushing for it.
PS: I see the gun industry lawsuit protection bill as a first step to badly needed wider tort reform. I dream of a day when someone can't sue McDonald's because they spilled coffee in their own lap or Anheuser-Busch because they drove their own Camaro into a tree while blotto...
A politician would stay ambiguous on an issue as long as it is to his advantage. What politicians are known for are the issues they choose to run on.
If a new AW ban reaches his desk he will sign it. But it also would mean that gun owners have failed to make their presence felt. He will sign it for votes.
Politics favors pragmatism over ethics.
If a new AW ban reaches his desk he will sign it. But it also would mean that gun owners have failed to make their presence felt. He will sign it for votes.
Politics favors pragmatism over ethics.
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
Another important thing to remember is that even if the ban does sunset (and I believe it will), the antis will surely be back again. It would certainly be in our best interests to make sure that it can't make it to the President's desk regardless of who that President is.
We have a 14-19 vote lead in the House; but we are down by several votes in the Senate. We lost the amendment vote 52-47 in March.
Luckily for us though, four of the people who voted against us are retiring from pro-gun southern states (Louisiana, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Florida) and one of the ringleaders, Sen. Tom Daschle is in a tight reelection race where gunowner turnout can easily sink him.
If we can get gunowners to vote their guns in these races, we can easily make the next two years AWB-proof regardless of who ends up in the White House.
We have a 14-19 vote lead in the House; but we are down by several votes in the Senate. We lost the amendment vote 52-47 in March.
Luckily for us though, four of the people who voted against us are retiring from pro-gun southern states (Louisiana, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Florida) and one of the ringleaders, Sen. Tom Daschle is in a tight reelection race where gunowner turnout can easily sink him.
If we can get gunowners to vote their guns in these races, we can easily make the next two years AWB-proof regardless of who ends up in the White House.
Taipei Personality
New member
I was speaking of the House as a whole and the difficulty of getting a gun control bill passed, not of the individual members' philosophies. That is why I referred to "a marginally pro-gun House" as opposed to the pro- or anti-gun stances of individual members.
Taipei Personality
New member
As others have stated, efforts to pass a clean version of a good bill do not equal efforts to prevent passage of a bad bill. If you have documented evidence that President Bush would not have signed a gun manufacturers' bill that was clean except for a renewal of the AWB, I'd like to see it. Based on his public comments, I believe he would have signed such a bill.