A lot of people om here seem to think the 1994 AWB MUST SUNSET! That is NOT true!

From S 1034:

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF SUNSET DATE.

Section 110105 of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act (18 U.S.C. 921 note) is amended to read as follows:

`SEC. 110105. EFFECTIVE DATE.

`This subtitle and the amendments made by this subtitle shall take effect on September 13, 1994.'.


From HR 2038:

SEC. 3. ELIMINATION OF SUNSET.

Section 110105 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is amended--

(1) by striking `--' and all that follows through `(1)'; and

(2) by striking `; and' and all that follows through `that date'.

Yes, it must sunset. That is a fact. That does not mean that Congress can't come along and change that fact prior to it happening. They could have removed the sunset provision at any time since it became law on 9/13/94. That is what these bills attempt to do.

The AWB [i]in its current form  [/i][B]will[/B] sunset on Sept. 13, 2004.

Or so we hope.  We are not career politicians, we have not spent our lives screwing people over in the name of furthering our careers.  It is certainly possible that something like the above could go through, however unlikely.

It might not me legal, and it might get beat on a technicality, but who is going to fight it?  We have a hard enough time getting the courts to aknowledge the RKBA/ 2nd amendment!!

`This subtitle and the amendments made by this subtitle shall take effect on September 13, 1994.'. [/b]

Doesn't that go aginst...

NOT if it is pre-empted by HR 2038 or S 1034.

Then it is replaced IMMEDIATELY.


CRC

How exactly does the Ex Post Facto Law play into this?

Sorry ,No ex post whatchamacallit [:(]

These bills would be EXTENSIONS of the current
ban (more restrictive of course)

I don't see it happening though.

According to the July 2003 American Rifleman (my NRA mag), one article mentions a May 14th Washington Post article regarding House Majority Leader Tom Delay as saying most House members are willing to let the the ban expire next year. It goes on to say that the Post will drum up votes for other legislation (including an outright ban of the AR-15).

So far, it looks like the ban might actually go away.

It is always easier to go with the status quo - like you say, "let it stand as written".  However, in that case, that means it will sunset - as the sunset is written into the original law itself.  Extending it will require new legislation.  If it were the case of actually passing new legislation to [i]repeal[/i] the AWB, then I agree that it wouldn't stand a chance in hell.

If it does get extended/replaced, I don't think it will be done so outright, but rather added to another pretty much totally unrelated piece of legislation that the republicans really want passed.

To answer your other question, the 1986 FOPA (Firearms Owner's Protection Act) repealed many of the nastier parts of the 1968 GCA.  However, the democrats did manage to sneak in the MG ban at the 11th hour - many argue that the language of this was very vague and it wasn't understood that it would completely ban manufacture of MG's for cilivian use until after it passed.  We're also seeing many more states adopt shall-issue CCW and CCW reciprocity with other states.  My state, PA, passed the Uniform Firearms Act within the last decade or so, which means that no town/locality/etc. can pass its own firearms laws.

Rocko

In your own state of Arkansas, the prohibition on concealed carry of handguns was removed and replaced by shall-issue licensing within the last ten years.

In 1986, the requirements to register handgun ammunition were repealed along with sections of the 1968 GCA that allowed the ATF to do unlimited warrantless inspections of FFLs (allowing them to "inspect" dealers out of business rather than go through the process set up to revoke their license).

Just this year in Texas, the legislature clarified a loophole in the original law and allowed legal concealed carry on municipal properties (they had been declaring publicly owned city property as off-limits since they were the "owner" of the property and Texas law allows private property owners to post their property).

Not only do gun laws get revoked, but this is a prime opportunity to do it. It is less effort than normal since this law is already scheduled to sunset. All we have to do is keep Congress in its natural state of gridlock in regards to this bill and we win. Not only that; but if we win, we will have revoked more bad federal gun laws in the last 20 years than we have passed - and that is a turning point worth fighting for.

In 1989 the law defining semi automatic rifles was relaxed from only permitting 20 round magazines, to allowing 30 round magazines.  This was done in defference to AR and AK shooters who primarily had only 30 rounders available in cheap and great number.  Prior to that any center fire semi automatic rifle affixed with a magazine of greater than 20 rounds was considered a machine gun under state law and required NFA registration.