GUN Assault Weapon Ban = lose-lose situation

Discussion in 'On Topic' started by 7, Jul 8, 2004.

  1. 7

    7 First comes smiles, then lies. Last is gunfire.

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2002
    Messages:
    25,055
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sure most of you guys who are up on this stuff already knew this but I thought I would share anyway. :hs:


    Why You Better Make Sure It Passes
    by David E. Petzal

    A few years ago, unable to eliminate firearms by vote, anti-gunners hit on a brilliant way to get the same result—they filed in municipal courts and sued gun companies for liability for crimes committed with guns. These suits have been thrown out in 24 cities, but they have damaged the firearms industry nonetheless by forcing it to pay $120 million in legal costs. Anti-gunners are rejoicing, because if the lawyers’ fees mount high enough, gun makers can go out of business.

    The remedy for this was S. 659—The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act—which would have prevented just this type of lawsuit. (It would not, reports to the contrary, have eliminated a manufacturer’s liability for defective guns, or for guns that are sold illegally.) It passed in the House, but on February 2, its opponents succeeded in attaching two measures that had already passed the Senate, but were anathema to gun owners. One extended the Clinton "assault weapons ban" for another ten years; the other required sellers at gun shows to run background checks on their customers.

    Rather than see these two measures passed into law, the NRA asked supporters of S.695 to reverse their vote and kill the measure. So we now have a standoff, but the fight is not over. In order for the firearms industry to survive, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act must become law. Don’t forget it. And, in an election year, don’t let the people who want your vote forget it, either.

    link to article (though the whole thing is posted here) :o :
    http://www.fieldandstream.com/fieldstream/shooting/article/0,13199,609304,00.html
     
  2. RealFastV6

    RealFastV6 OMFGh4x0rzZ!!111

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    885
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Connecticut
    This is old news.

    The Senate is debating today (sorta) a Class Action Lawsuit bill. (CSPAN-2) If passed, it will actually have an effect on some of these bullshit class action lawsuits. Most likely some of those class action firearms cases will get moved to Federal Court where the judges are at least less corrupt.

    The Dems wanted to attach the AWB and a bunch of other Non-Related ammendments to it because it's got 62 Co-Sponsors. The Majority Leader basically told them to fuck themselvs and that nothing Non-Related can be attached, so now they're all just going up there and talking about other things. Orrin Hatch is up there talking about Gay Marriage now.
     
  3. Jefferson Darcy

    Jefferson Darcy Ol' shit chest

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2002
    Messages:
    11,550
    Likes Received:
    0
    AWB = DEAD


    It will not come up for a straight up vote in the Senate and ESPECIALLY in the house anytime before the sunset or the election (and what hapens in the election will be a big deciding factor for what happens after)

    They want to attach it to that class action lawsuit bill. Majority leader Bill Frist is not allowing non-germane amendments to that (which means the AWB will not be attached).

    Both the House and Senate passed the bill that will allow off duty and retired police officers to carry anywhere in the country, abnd they passed it CLEAN. Alot of people (me included) thought this bill might be an oppurtunity for them to try to attach it. They didnt even try (more likely than not because they knew attaching it might kill the bill, and all politicians on both sides of teh gun issue like to appear pro-law enforcment).


    Congress recesses July 26th I believe, and doesnt reconvene till early september. The ban ends 12:00am Sept 13th.

    The ban is DEAD. :)
     
  4. ryanbum

    ryanbum Its the one that says Bad Mother Fucker on it

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,473
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston
    Don't jinx it!
     
  5. KiddX

    KiddX Tigth as Piston In Ferrari Engine!

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2003
    Messages:
    13,614
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    St. George, Utah
    so on september 13th people can buy assult rifles? are companies like H&k and colt gonna flood the market with the stuff they couldnt release before?
     
  6. footratfunkface

    footratfunkface New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    5,844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Covington, GA
    they've been able to make it all along, civilians just haven't been able to buy it unless they have a preban rifle. plenty of preban configured uppers keep getting bought for AR's. the only thing we'll really see flood the market is magazines. and even then, they've still been making them for LEO's.
     
  7. ozwald

    ozwald OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    1,371
    Likes Received:
    12
    no h&k would have to build a rifle plant here, i dunno what colts up too
     
  8. copiertalk

    copiertalk Secure Our Borders! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,695
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    west texas
    will the public be able to purchase guns made from 1994-2004? i understand that i can purchase a gun prior to the AWB, but what about guns produced during the AWB, will i, "public joe" be able to purchase those guns as well as new production after the sunset?

    just wondering if there is any legal questionality in this argument?
     
  9. Jefferson Darcy

    Jefferson Darcy Ol' shit chest

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2002
    Messages:
    11,550
    Likes Received:
    0
    The public is already allowed to purchase those guns... its just that they have a feature or two removed to comply with AWB.

    for instance, post ban AR-15's don't have flash surpressors, bayonet lugs or collapsible stocks... but have pistol grips.

    After the sunset you will be able to legaly attatch all of these things to your post ban AR.

    Yes, you will also be legally able to buy the weapons and magazines made between 94 and 04 that are fully featured and marked for sale to law enforcement only (that is, unless you live in a state with its own AWB)

    Some people question whether this will be the case or not... whether it will still be illegal to buy the LEO makred guns, or attach a banned feature to your post-ban.

    The answer is NO. On Sept 13th 2004, unless it is reenacted, the law becomes null and void, as if it never existed. Neither the law nor the definition of "assault weapon" will exist in Federal law.

    So, what that means, is as per federal law, there is no such thing as an assault weapon.

    You cannot be prosecuted for a violation of a law that does not exist.

    You cannot be federally prosecuted for posession of an assault weapon, when a definition of assault weapon does not exist in federal law.
     
  10. copiertalk

    copiertalk Secure Our Borders! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,695
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    west texas
    you answered my question.

    what i was thinking was if i own a 9mm (or 10/22 for that matter), if i purched a maganzine with more than ten rounds made in between 94 and 04, that would be legal. that was my question. if it was made prior to and after the ban it would be but i was affraid that the government would get picky about the 94-04 thing. thanks for the info!
     
  11. A96HondaAccordCoupeEX

    A96HondaAccordCoupeEX Silver Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2000
    Messages:
    37,989
    Likes Received:
    25
    Location:
    CA
    i purchase a "pre-ban or hi-cap" 15 round magazine for my gun no problem.
     
  12. Jefferson Darcy

    Jefferson Darcy Ol' shit chest

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2002
    Messages:
    11,550
    Likes Received:
    0
    re-introduced != reenacted.

    Its not gonna come up for a straight vote in the Senate, and DEFINATELY not in the house.

    It was thought the best way for feinstien to tey to get it thru was to use it as an amdenment on another bill... and it has to be one with bipartisan support.

    It was thought she would try to stick it to either the class action lawsuit bill, or the nationwide concealed carry for off duty and retired cops.

    The cop-carry bill passed quietly with no amendments.

    Majority Leader Bill Frist would not allow an unlimited amount of non-germane amendments to the Class action bill... so the democrats bitched and moaned (because they wanted to attach AWB even tho they never came out and said it) and now that bill has been pretty much shitcanned for now.

    Congress recesses for the summer on July 26th. They come back Sept 5th. The ban ends Sept 13th.

    There is pretty much no time for the gun grabbers to do anything.

    The republican leadership don't want it getting within a mile of Bush's desk... they KNOW that would be a lose lose situation for teh re-election.


    And on top of that I think the Democrat leadership don't really want to pass it, and would rather it sunset so they can try to use the issue against Bush "He allowed Uzi's and AK-47's to flood the streets again" :jerkit:
     
  13. big_john2438

    big_john2438 Guest

    assualt weapons rock only criminals will get them regarless if they are legal or not
     

Share This Page