AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - H.R. 2038 AWB and LEPA 2003 (Page 1 of 4)
Posted: 5/20/2003 11:46:33 AM EDT
|
Just did a stare and compare to 1994 AWB, and the lawmakers are doing exactly what we all feared they would do... Key differences in old AWB and current proposed 2003 AWB - 1) List of banned weapons is expanded, and very specific (tighter regulation by Anti-gun politicians) 2)Elimination of the "has least 2 of - " clause to list of banned features... Now ALL features are banned 3)Elimination of Sunset provision. Now it is a permanent ban 4)Grandfather provision modified - weapons are illegal to transfer. You can own one, but only you, and you cannot transfer to someone else. This may even extend to your descendants... 5)Repeal of exceptions... GUESS WHAT FOLKS - NO EXCEPTIONS Bolt, pump, lever, or slide are not exempt from the ban... If this law passes the 2nd amendment is dead 
|
|
Bayonet & Grenade Launcher have been replaced with Barrel Shroud, and forward grip... Of the (5) items listed all are evil not just 2 of the 5 - ALL are evil... By definition - Post-Ban rifles are included in the new ban. In fact all rifles are banned - nothing is exempt... [sniper2] |
| I think that you are referring to the McCarthy/Conyers Bill which is far more draconian than the Feinstein, Schumer, etc. Bill not that it is any better. The McCarthy/Conyers bill will die a quick death in the House because it also includes rifles and shotguns that are used only for hunting and sporting purposes. [sarcasm]Smart move![/sarcasm] This is probably the major nudge that the hunting community needed to make them understand that this is not just about AW's. They are next on the antigunners' radar screen. |
|
Well thank you very much. I read this post, and the bill several hours ago. Now as I lay here in bed, I cannot sleep. The rage has over come me. I cannot for the life of me understand the arrogance/ignorance of these socialistic pukes. Who the F&%# is voting for these people? Do they not understand "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"? How much simpler does it get. We may win this war, but our country is heading down a dark path. Somebody mentioned ATF kicking in their door to take their guns. Is this what America has become? A once great country, once filled with great men that were willing to put their lives on the line, their families lives on the line, and to DIE over taxes!!! I cannot believe that in 200 years we have become a nation of PUSSIES!!! All of us! I cannot believe we have let them strip away the rights they already have. I'm not just talking about guns here either. Our country has gotten out of hand, our government out of control, and our citizens are either smoking crack, collecting a wellfair check, or are braindead. We as responsible americans need to send a message to our elected officials. We are not going to take this SHIT anymore. I cannot say that if the goverment came for my guns right now that I wouldn't hand them over... I can't say that, I don't know what I would do. My only hope is that we, as a collective population will stop the rape of our rights, and the murder of the US Constitution WAY before that becomes an issue. Sorry to rant, but that sh!t p!sses me off.P STUPID F#CKING COMMIE PINKO F@GGOTS! |
|
The Title of the Bill is - [b]To Reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes[/b] "Other Purposes" - theAnti-gun politicians have brazenly shown their cards... They are so cocky they want everyone to see exactly where they are going with this... If Compromise is their goal, and they concede on everything but the changes they want to impose on Sections 2, 3, and 4, then - 1) Bushmaster, Armalite & Olympic are specifically targeted... 2) The Grandfather section is retro to Sept. 1994... this means you can own a Pre-ban, but [b]Post bans are illegal[/b], period!!! 3) And the sunset is eliminated - it never sets, the ban is permanent... The gawl of these people... We're heading for a Nazi state at this rate... with the Patriot Act, and gun control we are back in the days preceding World War II in Nazi Germany... Germans lived in fear that anyone could accuse them (wrongfully) of anything, and the Gestapo would haul them off - never to be seen again... History is in danger of repeating itself, and sadly we never learn from it... God Help Us. [sniper2] |
|
Quoted: [b][size=6]If this law passes the 2nd amendment is dead[/size=6][/b] What is Dead is our entire way of life; the American (USA) way. The Second Amendment will still exist but it and the rest of the Constitution won’t be worth the paper it’s written on. If one of the Bill of Rights can be written away without a Constitutional convention…well Socialism/Communism here we come…. It’s time to get [b] [size=6] VOCAL [/size=6][/b], call, wright, hold protests, and get involved. We can’t let the whims of a few drag this Country down. [soapbox] |
|
I know a lot of youz guys are aware of other shooting/gun related sites. If so you need to make this info available to the people on those boards. Urge them to get involved also. I put a post on Shooters.com about this. Those guys are mostly hunters but should see that they are most likely next on the anti's agenda. Strength in numbers don't ya know. Make your reps shake in their boots with the thought of possibly of being voted out next time around. Shabo |
|
I have found that sending a copy of a savings account statement titled, "To be used to start a recall campaign of Mr/Mrs 'X'" along with my opinion(s) about bill 'X' seems to get their attention. Let's face it, the most important thing to these "representatives" it to stay in office - not do what we want/ask. So I say hittem where it hurts - THEIR JOB. I, like probably all the other members of this board, consider the 2nd amendment to be an individual and sacred right along with the rest of the individual rights -free speech, freedom of religion. I must say the possibility of this type of legislation both scares and deeply offends me. Of course, I was getting pretty diapointed with the herd welfare mentality prior to 9/11 and I was pleasantly supprised with how my fellow countrymen and women responded - so dont give up yet folks. We are a fucked up and disfunctional family, but we are still the greatest thing going! However, if they end up getting this SHIT thru, what else am I gunna do with my spare time? I cant play golf - 9 pins in the shoulder prevent it. So I might as spend all that range time screwing the folks (legally, if they dont delete free speech while theyre gutting our rights) that did it to me. Okay, I'll stop rambling now that the rain has let up and I can go to the range... |
|
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but after reading the text of HR2038 Sec 5 [Repeal of certain Exemptions] it appears to state that section 922 v3 title 18 will be changed to read: "Paragraph (1) shall NOT apply to any firearm that-- (a)is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action;" Again I'm not certain, but I think this IS exempting the bulk of the sporting guns and not restricting them or classifying as "assault weapons" if it did then most of the US mfg's would be hard pressed to stay in business and in a downed economy this would not be a good thing for anyone. At least that's how I interpreted it. |
|
Quoted: Please correct me if I'm wrong, but after reading the text of HR2038 Sec 5 [Repeal of certain Exemptions] it appears to state that section 922 v3 title 18 will be changed to read: "Paragraph (1) shall NOT apply to any firearm that-- (a)is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action;" Again I'm not certain, but I think this IS exempting the bulk of the sporting guns and not restricting them or classifying as "assault weapons" if it did then most of the US mfg's would be hard pressed to stay in business and in a downed economy this would not be a good thing for anyone. At least that's how I interpreted it. I believe you are right... I the heat of reading this thing I got this part wrong... Good catch and [b]MY BAD...[/b] But they are repealing something??? So I'd have to compare the existing exceptions (exemptions) to see what they are chipping away at... Don't trust they AT ALL... [sniper2] |
|
Sorry, but my reading of this bill I get that they want to ban ALL semi-automatic rifles, shotguns and pistols. Here is a part: `(J) A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L). sounds like anything |
|
What isn't caught under subparagraph (b) to Section 3, part (iv), it will be... "caught" by the other sneaky subsections they weaseled into this thing... It is their stated intention by the verbage of this bill to disarm you... and me, and him... and everybody... [sniper2] ___________________ "Can't we all just get along" -Bill Clinton Yeah, right??? |
|
[b]"I cannot believe that in 200 years we have become a nation of PUSSIES!!! All of us! I cannot believe we have let them strip away the rights they already have."[/b] So you can't believe it. They are trying to take away any mention of the founding fathers in the history books. They say these White men were the roots of evil and that children should not be taught about their ideas. At least that is what I think. If they are willing to do that, why don't you think they would care about our guns. |
|
Every one must become active if we are to prevent the AWB from being renewed or worse strengthened. I wrote this and sent this e-mail to Pres. Bush and to Congress: May 15, 2003 Dear President Bush, Please do all that you are able to do to prevent those attempting to re-authorize the so-called “Assault Weapons Ban”. It is clear that this is an attempt to control the people, not guns, and to take away the people’s ability to be responsible citizens. It is a paternalistic desire of those trying to pass this controlling law. They have only succeeded in controlling the law abiding citizenry; they have not impaired criminals in any way, nor will this new attempt do so. I also see this as an effort by the freedom-hating people to create a new class of citizens to be envied, as Law Enforcement personal will be able to retain and purchase their weapons as they wish. Thank you for your time and help. |
|
BigIck, I must have an older copy of HR 2038 as I can't even locate the section you referenced. This bill is full of twists turns and a few errors. I will check to see if it has been revised and get the current copy. Everyone needs to jump in here and get involved and not just assume that the ban will sunset in Sept '04. All it will take is someone in the house flexing some political muscle [or some arm twisting] to get what they want. Do not assume anything when it comes to politicians! It was comrismise [a more accurate term would be concession] that got Bush #1 to initiate the import ban and political pandering that got the '94 Federal crime bill passed. Don't leave this up to the NRA or we could be facing a day when no one can own a so-called assault weapon. |
|
Quoted: BigIck, I must have an older copy of HR 2038 as I can't even locate the section you referenced. This bill is full of twists turns and a few errors. I will check to see if it has been revised and get the current copy. Everyone needs to jump in here and get involved and not just assume that the ban will sunset in Sept '04. All it will take is someone in the house flexing some political muscle [or some arm twisting] to get what they want. Do not assume anything when it comes to politicians! It was comrismise [a more accurate term would be concession] that got Bush #1 to initiate the import ban and political pandering that got the '94 Federal crime bill passed. Don't leave this up to the NRA or we could be facing a day when no one can own a so-called assault weapon. It's under Section 2 Definitions... It broadens the 'semiautomatic assult weapon' meaning... and when I say broadens, I mean this is their "catch-all" clause... The provision that really worries me (if I'm reading it right) is [b]Section 4 Grandfather Provisions (2) by striking [red]'on the date of this subsection'[/red]and INSERTING [red]'as of September 13, 1994'[/red][/b] This to me means that if you bought a rifle (post-ban) with a shroud, grip, detachable mag AFTER Sept 13, 1994, then... guess what IT is illegal... If they had left (2) alone, then post-bans would slip under the cut-off line, but by making the NEW PROPOSED BAN retro to 1994, my brand new Bushmaster becomes illegal... Slick Politicians - That may be why the press wanted to interview Bushmaster. What has the ban done for your companies bottom-line??? What??? Nothing??? We'll we'll have to correct that by making your cosmetic changes illegal... [sniper2] |
|
cutter, the current executive order isn't a law. Therefore this legislation would be a new law. I am not an attorney, but from what I understand about law, I don't believe it is legal to make something illegal retroctive to the law signing date and then prosecute people for what are now illegal actions, hence the concept of grandfathering. EDITED TO ADD: That's why we have people who are prosecuted and convicted for what should be a death penalty case under the current law, but because at the time they committed the crime, there was no death penalty - so no injection for them. |
| Hey Ben...I think they pull this shit all the time. Look at Kalif. With a swish of the pen, your AR/AK is now ilegal and they can prosecute you for it. Also...don't for get that Kliton ordered Bentsen to make the Streetsweeper a restricted firearm, and it only took 2 WEEKS for the legislation to become active. And if you now have one without the correct paperwork, you're in deep doo doo. |
| Ok after reading this bill [for what seems like the 20th time] I've got a migraine. The section [(J) A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L).] I think deals with parts that could be used to make any the preceeding weapons on the expanded list from parts kits. In essence remomving any possibility of building a post-ban compliant weapon. Sec. 4-Grandfather provisions- I will have to review on it's own as it does appear that they are trying to make a law retroactive [ex-post facto law] which is not supposed to be possible in our system of gov't. Big surprise. Sec 7 also has some interesting wording as well, but it needs further review. Need to have this whole darn thing reviewed by someone who has a little more legal expertise than myself. As for executive orders they are de facto law even though the congress and senate have not passed them via the proper constitutional route. |
|
Quoted: Sec. 4-Grandfather provisions- I will have to review on it's own as it does appear that they are trying to make a law retroactive [ex-post facto law] which is not supposed to be possible in our system of gov't. Ex-Post Facto is passing a law, making illegal something you have already done. They are not doing this. They are making illegal something you already own, and will only punish you for possession of it from this day forward. Thus it is not ex-post facto. Still sucks, as you face jail or destroying your property. |
|
Hey guys, its almost June! Ya know what that means!? The next dollar I earn actually belongs to me. (the first 5 months, I work for Uncle Sam. He gives me my rights, ya know. Tells me I'm free.) Is this a great country or what!? Anyway, its almost June! Perfect timing guys, cause I can now focus on the 2nd Amendment. After we resolve the 2nd A issues, can we focus on the 16th Amendment? How I'd like to be a free man! Well, at least I have an AR15. I don't know however, if I should admit to having more than 1 at this time. |
|
[b]CRC[/b] here's my read... [red]Section A[/red] specifically lists [b]specific[/b]'semi-automatic ASSAULT rifles' - types, and manufacturers... [red]Section D[/red] catches [b]anything missed[/b] specifically listed in section A that [b]looks[/b] cosmetically like an assault rifle... [red]Section K[/red] covers kit guns (see broad definition of conversion kits, and it is apparent that they want us to stop building guns from parts) [red]Section L[/red] covers anything missed by section A THRU K... as determined by the Attorney General, and covers MATCH rifles... Basically MILITARY STYLE RIFLES are not suitable for sporting purposes... therefore civilians are prohibited from owning them... [sniper2] |
|
Quoted: [b]CRC[/b] here's my read... [red]Section A[/red] specifically lists [b]specific[/b]'semi-automatic ASSAULT rifles' - types, and manufacturers... [red]Section D[/red] catches [b]anything missed[/b] specifically listed in section A that [b]looks[/b] cosmetically like an assault rifle... [red]Section K[/red] covers kit guns (see broad definition of conversion kits, and it is apparent that they want us to stop building guns from parts) [red]Section L[/red] covers anything missed by section A THRU K... as determined by the Attorney General, and covers MATCH rifles... Basically MILITARY STYLE RIFLES are not suitable for sporting purposes... therefore civilians are prohibited from owning them... [sniper2] That's my take too- multiple filters. CRC |
|
For all you guys who don't think laws can be retroactive (ex-post facto), remember what that piece of shit Lautenberg got passed in 1997: the inability to own a gun if you were EVER convicted of the MISDEMEANOR charge of domestic violence. The only constitutional right stripped away by a misdemeanor, not a felony. So not only is it a retroactive law, it also punishes a misdemeanor as a felony. Both are unconstitutional. BTW, Lautenberg shouldn't even be in power now, except for the illegal bullshit the Dems pulled during the election. The law doesn't apply to them, only to YOU! |
|
This is a lot like a state law they tried to shove down our throats here in IllAnnoy--banned anything over .50 caliber. The antis never stopped to think (shocker there) that would include muzzleloaders, almost all shotguns, etc. The firestorm that ensued sent a loud message to our downstate senators, and they listened. Chicago is afraid to call that bill now--they know it'll never fly. I agree with those who have said we need to make our voices heard. I really believe that the lawsuit preemption and AWB sunset are ours to lose. |
|
McCarthy was a stupid f---ing Long Island housefrau until her husband was killed by the wacko who shot up the LIRR train (100 yards from my old house). Remember, he did it with a Ruger 9mm (no assault weapon, whatever that is). He also waitied until the train was outside of NYC so it wouldn't reflect poorly on then Mayor David Dinkens. McCarthy is such a witch and stupid as dirt. It goes to show how the sympathy vote puts idiots in congress. She wins on one-issue and a yearly appearance on Oprah. |
|
Here's McCarthy's introduction remarks for the bill. She infers that all AR owners are in fact, criminals, since there is no legitimate reason to own an AR. SPEECH OF HON. CAROLYN McCARTHY OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THURSDAY, MAY 8, 2003 Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the ``Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003.'' This legislation will renew and strengthen the current assault weapons ban set to expire this Congress. I am joined by 68 of my colleagues in support of this legislation and overall goal of keeping illegal firearms out of the hands of criminals. In September 2004, the assault weapons ban, which is supported by virtually every Federal, State and local law enforcement agency, is set to expire. Since its introduction in 1994, the ban has increased public safety and prevented dangerous weapons from falling into the hands of violent criminals, including gang members and terrorists. Unfortunately, even with its many successes, would-be criminals have demonstrated the ban's limitations. A gun manufacturer's ability to slightly modify an assault weapon, and the sale of ``parts kits'' which permit criminals to assemble unlawful assault weapons, is a massive loophole in the current law, allowing these weapons to flood the market and jeopardize the lives of law enforcement officers Additional steps must be taken to address these types of problems. This legislation begins by improving upon the current definition of a semi-automatic assault weapon to include any semi-automatic weapon that accepts a detachable ammunition magazine and possesses, a single, narrowly defined, assault weapon characteristic. Furthermore, it contains a provision that makes it more difficult for individuals to purchase or sell parts that make it possible to convert a lawful semi-automatic weapon into an unlawful assault weapon. During the 2000 election cycle, then-Governor Bush made a campaign promise to support the extension of the ban, as did Attorney General Ashcroft during his 2001 Senate confirmation hearing. I am glad to hear of their support and look forward to working with them in the upcoming months. I can think of no legitimate reason for civilians to have access to military-style weapons that are useless for recreational activities and only serve the purpose of furthering unwanted criminal activity. |
|
She said it on my birthday too. The same day I got 10 30rnd USGI mags. ;) The thing is that there is only a small hardcore group of anti-gun nuts. Most other people will just belive what their told without any strong convictions. The thing is there are more people in the NRA than there is in any of the anti-gun associations (remember the million mom march, lol). What makes New York the State suck is New York the City. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - H.R. 2038 AWB and LEPA 2003 (Page 1 of 4)
AR Sponsor
Join the Community
Your next conversation starts here.
Create your free account to join discussions, share your experience, save topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.
- Join discussions
- Follow topics and replies
- Connect with fellow enthusiasts
Already a member? Sign in
Stay informed by subscribing to our Newsletter