Well...I don't feel too positive about it not being replaced. However, I'll continue to be active in grass roots, vote, and think positive, and try to educate people.  We better be also trying to educate YOUNGER people...  I figure what will happen IF the ban goes away completely is we will have 3 classes of AW's.  Preban, postban, and post 04.  You have a preban or post 04 and it can have evil features, but post bans must stay in original configuration.  Yeah, doesn't make sense but this is the guvment we're talking about.  Makes no more sense than pre and post 86 MG's.  Talk about stupid, the exact same functionality and look, one day makes the difference between happy MG owner and felon.  Not that I'm advocating a MG ban, but if one is legal, why not all?  As far as the NRA, GOA and TV ads...I seem to remember NRA ads along the lines of "Vote Freedom First" and no matter the flames, I will say that any gun owner who isn't an NRA member is an idiot!  Whether we agree with them totally or not, GOA still doesn't have the pull of the NRA politically and won't for a long time, if ever.  It would be hard to argue with an 80 million member NRA over anything, that's a BIG chunk of American voters.  I get so tired of hearing about "I don't agree with them being middle of the road on (insert pet peeve here)" or "I didn't ever get reimbursed for that firearm they insured back in 1975".  Come on people, join GOA too, I did...but EVERYONE knows who the NRA is, whether they LIKE them or not.  If everyone, who owned any gun, was an NRA member, we'd never have to worry about gun control again.  Ok...rant off, flame on!

You are right.   When the law sunsets, it EXPIRES.  No restriction or provision within it will be a valid law anymore...but you still have to watch out for state laws that may cover similar ground.  In the socialist-run states of California, New Jersey, and New York, this will be an issue.

But for the rest of us, we can then go out and BUY weapons and high capacity magazines that are marked 'for law enforcement or government use only' and  use them, and we can also put the flash hider, bayonet lug, collapsible stock, pistol grip, and grenade launcher back on any rifle that's missing them.    

I know for sure that when this happens (if there is no newer law in place covering the ground) then I definitely want to buy some LEO magazines and even an LEO marked rifle, just because I can.

CJ

Quoted: House GOA ratings * White indicates No Rating

Well,

I live in F-land. Not that there was ever any doubt.

Anyone who thinks the AW ban will sunset w/o response should probably pay close attention to the upcoming gun debate in SoKal. If attitudes have truly been changed, SoKal would be a good place to test them. Personally, I'm not holding my breath. The left is already capitalizing on "fear" once again, calling for further restrictions. The lessons to be learned from 9/11 are not concretely agreed upon, and gun control is still fair game in politics.

I'd love to be utterly wrong on this one. Fear is the perfect tool for realizing political gains. It offers no reason, yet commands strong loyalty. "Fear is the mind killer," (a la "Dune"), takes on a whole new reality in the world politics. People who respond to fear are rarely swayed by reason. You think a "million momz" are going to think past the satisfaction of their own demands? This is their "crusade", and crusades don't make room for fairness & reason.

Seriously - these "womyn" walked around DC carrying signs emblazened with ridiculous phrases like, "Shame on you. Go to your room". Go to my room? - what the hell is that? If I have to "go to my room", then I'm taking my toys with me. All of them.

Sorry boyz & girlz, but I don't believe this thing is going to die quietly. There are simply too many dupes out there ready to swallow Alec (I think I'm getting fat) Baldwin's spew, or Ted (Where's the womynz?) Kennedy's moonshine, or Rosie O'(Have you hugged your gay, beached whale today) Donnell's packed fudge.

And no disrespect to the female persuasion on this board. A lot of women don't buy that leftist garbage either.

I just hope I'm dead wrong here.

Quoted: I figure what will happen IF the ban goes away completely is we will have 3 classes of AW's.  Preban, postban, and post 04.  You have a preban or post 04 and it can have evil features, but post bans must stay in original configuration.  Yeah, doesn't make sense but this is the guvment we're talking about

You're misunderstanding how this works.  When the law sunsets there will be absolutely NO significance to the date September 13th, 1994 (None, nada, zilch) unless a new law is passed specifically recognizing that date as the cutoff.  If identical language as the 94 ban is used ("the date of enactment") then all rifles configured as SAAWs will probably end up being grandfathered pre-bans (though I doubt the BATF will see things this way!)

Master Blaster, whatever they say in that "debate" in Cali is meaningless outside of Cali.

Everyone I think, pretty much understands that California, Illinois, New York and New Jersy are going to have to be smacked down in the courts. This buisness with gun control is the the opposite extreme from Jim Crow in the south. And amongst the white enhabitants of the Southern states in the 50's and 60's Jim Crow was extreamly popular. The state legislatures took steps to make Jim Crow both broader and tougher at the same time the Feds, supported by public opinion in the REST of the country, were cracking down on them.  California and some of these other states are exhibiting some of the same characteristics of the south in the last days of Jim Crow. Ultimately they will be crushed, just like Jim Crow was.

The more I read on the issue, the more comforatable I feel about it.  Even if there is a lapse of time, between laws, I bet the manufactures are definately gonna tool up and make surplus just in case things get screwed up down the road.  

PGM---I'm still gonna say that we need to get the issue addressed in the public eye.  Those liberals are definately gonna bring it up, just a matter of time.  I'm gonna say that the already anti-gunners are never gonna change their minds (at least no decent %age anyway).  

It seems to me that most of us don't like to change our minds once they've been made, even if it's an issue we don't care much about. Let me know if I'm wrong on this point.-------
   
If the fence sitters are reached by the anti-gunners first, they will be more likely to makeup their minds in-line with the anti-gunners.  Again, we are not gonna change the
minds of the anti-gunners, we will only be  educating the fence sitters and making the silent majority who I really belive would be with us if they only knew.

If some libral gets up there and starts ranting about evil assault weapons, they will make people say OH NO we must get rid of them....But if we get up there first, we can educate them on how rediculous this whole thing really is, and of course point out the fact that it hasn't changed a damn thing as far as criminals using weapons.  A criminal is a criminal is a creiminal; they are gonna continue to be criminals until we make them pay for their crimes and keep them in the fuckin prisons instead of making excuses for them and setting them back out on the streets to commit more crimes...isntead of treading on the rights of law abiding citizens.

Lets here some more opinions, this is just mine, but if ya'll think I should "let the sleeping dawg lie" let me know and perhaps I'll just keep the meida out of my list.

I just believe that the silent majority is with us here, we just need to start running our mouths as the librals do.

Like I've said before, I don't know a soul period that beleives in this strict kind of gun-control.  Do ya'll really believe that we are outnumbered??? (a sincere question)  Maybe it's because I'm in a conservative state???

Quoted: Master Blaster, whatever they say in that "debate" in Cali is meaningless outside of Cali. Everyone I think, pretty much understands that California, Illinois, New York and New Jersy are going to have to be smacked down in the courts. This buisness with gun control is the the opposite extreme from Jim Crow in the south. And amongst the white enhabitants of the Southern states in the 50's and 60's Jim Crow was extreamly popular. The state legislatures took steps to make Jim Crow both broader and tougher at the same time the Feds, supported by public opinion in the REST of the country, were cracking down on them.  California and some of these other states are exhibiting some of the same characteristics of the south in the last days of Jim Crow. Ultimately they will be crushed, just like Jim Crow was.

My point was in regards to judging public opinion. As far as the courts are concerned, I'm still waiting for the SC to rule definitively on the issue & they have yet to accept a case on it. Emerson is the test here.

As to "smacking down" the afformentioned states, this has already been done, to some extent, through the dismissal of the frivilous lawsuits that were filed by state AG's.

The fight goes on. We shall see.

Judging public opinion in California is useful only in California.  I guarantee you the results will be different in many other states. In the southern states, we're much more pro-gun on average, and that also applies to the central states where you don't find so many big cities.

Anti-gun attitudes tend to be concentrated around big cities.  Probably as a result of draconian anti-gun laws that have been in effect in those areas for many years.   It's no surprise that people will say they don't like what they haven't tried.  

CJ

Blaster, throwing out the lawsuits was just a slap on the wrists. If that. No I mean a real Brown vs. Board of Ed spanking, kind of like what happened in Ohio at the local level only at the state level or even the federal level.

Can anyone give me detail as to which laws prohibit re-importation of our us made military firearms, such as m1 carbines, wihch I understand thousands are still out there abroad?  Is there more than one law?  Been searching the web and atf site, but they are unclear (probably on ourpose)
Trying to write my congressmen, and want to present a well thought-out argument, as I understand my rep in the house voted for the 94 ban, but i'll let him know he aint getting my vote if he's planning on replacing or renewing it.

Unfortunately, the really sad part of this is we don't NEED the fence sitters on our side.  It would be nice, but if you classify fence sitters as non gun owners, they really probably wouldn't count much if all gun owners worked together to prevent any more, and repeal current gun controls.  If you haven't ever run into this you're lucky, but I think most of us have.  We go to the range with our AR, or even our handguns, and the uppity folks there, shooters mind you, look at you like something that crawled out from under a rock.  Then proceed to say something to the effect of "Why do you need that many rounds, it should only take one to kill a deer"  Then there are those who shoot but are against killing anything other than a paper target or clay pigeon.  Not that there is anything wrong with not hunting, per se, it's just that sometimes gun owners are our own worst enemy!  I don't see many liberals that can't put aside their differences to lobby for gun control, and we should be the same way.  Maybe it's the fact that almost all gun owners are somewhat independent and rebellious.  Maybe rebellious is the wrong term, but we all tend to be individuals, and that's great as long as we can come together for something for the common good, and there are too many that CANNOT seem to do that.   However, there IS hope...seems to work wonders when I point out to my deer hunter friends who look down on "Assault Weapons" that their .243 or 30-06 shoots "Cop Killer" bullets, or their bird hunting shotguns are the same functionally as a riot gun. Oh well...we'll wait and see, and work while we wait, and live with what comes I suppose.  

hey kicker, I really meant the fence sitters as the ones that haven't given it much thought.  My dad for instance bought me my SKS in 94 (I was 16 or 17), and when I said I was gonna get a 30rd mag he said the same thing "what would you need that for" my reply, cuz I can.  He was never much into hunting or guns, but had a shotgun.  It wasn't until this past Christmas that he fired my SKS along with other rifles and pistols; and he enjoyed the heck out of it, and was sorry he'd never done this before.  (I'd been away in the Corps for awhile)  

I guess I'm getting away from the point here, but the point is: these are the folks we need to reach here, the folks that don't realize that our rights have been trampled on, and don't realize that gun control has only led to evil in the past, ie as the Nazi's for starters.

I agree that the main thing is to make sure that the gunowners band together, but many gunowners aren't ecven aware that there ever was an "assault weapons" ban.

I've seen the type you're talking about, those conceited bolt action guys; but what about the yuppies with $500+ 22 target pistols that don't know what an AR15 is?  They want to shoot it.  These folks just don't know.  Those are the ones that need guidance and education on the issue...

And the conceited bolt action guy......he don't realize that one day, "they" will be after his bolt action too, if we let em.

It would seem that no matter what, all current LEO Restricted guns will become Pre-Bans on 9/14/2004. The current law will sunset and they cannot set a date further back than the date of enactment for Pre-Ban status. So, all the Type 07s need to gear up and put out as many LEO Mags. and guns as they can just in case a new law is passed.

I strongly believe any new law won't make it out of the House and most likely won't even make it to the house floor. I.E. Dead in Comitee, or Not put on the calendar. If it did make it to the Senate, they may well pass it especially with Elizabeth "Who needs an AK-47" Dole in office. If it makes it to Bush's desk, he has 3 choices:

1) Sign it into law.
2) Ignore it for 10 Days and it will become law w/o a signature.
3) Veto it.

Despite what others say about Bush's comments. I never took them to mean he supported an AW Ban like we have now. I would see him going along with some kind of crap like the Bill Ashcroft wrote when he was in the Senate (A Bill which was shelfed in favor of a worse bill). But, Ashcroft's bill would have banned "juvenille" posession of AWs. It would have made it illegal for anybody under 18 to possess or any parent to allow a child to possess "evil" black rifles. As I understand it, Bush has said he would support such a law with a 21 age, not that he would support a ban on AWs as a whole.

This is most likely how they will tackle it. THey cannot win with a cosmetic ban, nor can they win with a broad ban. But, they could make it harder by:

1) Reclassifying AWs similar to Handguns. Thereby banning Juvenille possession and requiring alot more crap to buy (waiting period, etc...)

2) Modifying the FFL List to include a new type such as Dealer in Assault Weapons. This would make it harder to find a lisenced dealer to handle transfers, etc...

3) Mandatory waiting period. This would make it more of a hassle/pain in the ass.

4) More extensive record keeping. Reports of dispositions of multiple AWs much like multiple hangun sales are currently reported.

5) More minimum sentencing guidelines for crimes with AWs.

6) A Broader definition of an AW. This could be done since they wouldn't be banned. Thereby, anything semi-auto. with a detachable mag. would become an AW and would require alot more hoops to buy/sell/etc...

Quoted: Only if you let it be.   Do you really think the liberals can drum up more loudmouths than we can?   Hell, no, they can't, not if we focus our efforts on it!     And that's all we really need, to make more noise than the other side.  We can also rightly use the best and most patriotic arguments for our side, too: Here are some concept ideas: Some people don't want you to be able to protect yourself and are trying to ban guns AGAIN to do just that.   It didn't work before, why would it work now?   Criminals STILL don't obey the law no matter how hard the law tries to make them. Ten year's worth of an assault weapons ban didn't reduce crime. Concealed carry permits being issued in many states DID and DO reduce crime. EVERY state that has issued concealed carry permits has experienced a DROP in crime and crime has STAYED down. You have the right to defend yourself and your family. The highly popular and fun to shoot "Assault weapons" are just like any other gun except for their appearance.   Do you really think it's right to ban a gun because of the way it looks?   Criminals ignore laws.  You and I obey them.  If the law says 'turn in your guns', you and I might turn them in. But will the criminals turn theirs in, too?  Think about it.  Think about it late at night when you hear a noise at your bedroom window. Does a bayonet lug or a collapsible stock make a gun more dangerous?   How? I could come up with simple, sound bite-sized comments and arguments in support of our cause for hours on end.  Many of them would be as persuasive and effective as 'just do it' or 'obey your thirst' or 'think different' if they were properly presented.     Perhaps it would be wise for us to contact a world class ad agency (the ones responsible for these highly effective slogans and ads) and see if they could help our cause by presenting our point of view in the most positive way possible. Examples: Smith and Wesson: Simple, reliable protection products. Because your family is worth defending. Colt:  When your life depends on it. H&K:  In an unsafe and unreliable world, here's safety you can rely on. See?   It's not that hard to make a positive presentation. I can envision TV spots that would highlight the benefits of firearms for personal protection and for recreational activity.    And that's what we really NEED, actually. CJ

The only thing I can say is damn,you hit it dead on! I am so tired of Lazy gun owners out there who dont want to take a stand and think someone else will do it for them,if even 10% of all the gun owners in the US would march in DC or even 5% that would dwarf and Million Mom(yuppie) March that has ever taken place!


Come for my guns........I'll give ya the bullets first!

The fact of the matter is Bush is FOR the Ban on NORMAL CAP mags (change the lingo bro) and supports the military / sporter arm ban. This was posted on his 2000 website.

Republican majority is not enough for a New Yourk republican is more liberal than a Georgia Democrat.

Yu don't reckin there was really  million of em do ya. (momz that is)

Hole-E-shit look at this http://www.millionmommarch.org/features/timeout/index.asp

I'm looknig to see exactly how many there are, and stumbled on that shit, I guess we all need to do our future hardware purchases from Lowes.

Actually, last year's Million Mom March on Washington, DC brought about two hundred.

They were outnumbered by their detractors.

CJ

WEll
i found it on their website, it syas 750,000,
They they didn't even mention one in 2001....
so their claim of a million is fake...fiction.....buullllllshiiiit,
how can you trust a mom that would lie about the numbers in her activist group???  Shaaame Shaaaame I know yer name.

Hey...we all know that women are bad with numbers.   That's because ever since they hit puberty, they've been told time and time again that something that's as big as her thumb is eight inches long.

CJ