Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/30/2002 11:22:41 AM EDT
I heard that in 2004 the ban could expire and we will be able to buy "pre-ban" guns and mags. Is this true? What is the likelyhood that it will happen?
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 11:48:07 AM EDT
This is about as likely as a Godzilla attack.

People who believe in this probably believe in the easter bunny and the tooth fairy as well.

Dennis Jenkins

Originally Posted By Guardian:
I heard that in 2004 the ban could expire and we will be able to buy "pre-ban" guns and mags. Is this true? What is the likelyhood that it will happen?

Link Posted: 9/30/2002 11:51:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/30/2002 11:52:12 AM EDT by Mugzilla]
You can buy all the prebans you want. You just can't build an AR with preban features. I am certain this has been beaten into a dead horse a few times. Search the board for info on wat a preban is...
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 12:04:03 PM EDT
Uh, the expiration of the Assault Weapons Ban is VERY VERY real unlike the tooth fairy or easter bunny.

On the other hand, it's ultimate repeal or expiration IS about as likely as a Godzilla attack as an earlier poster said.

What you are referring to is a sunset provision in the ban...here is a short excerpt about sunset provisions:

"Sunset laws have been promoted by Congress as a means of ending this cycle of statutory debasement. A sunset law is a statute or provision in a law that requires periodic review of the rationale for the continued existence of the particular law, administrative agency, or other governmental function... Most recently, Congress has used sunset provisions in a few narrow contexts. For example, the 1994 Crime Bill's controversial assault-weapons ban sunsets within 10 years. Also, the end of 1995 will mark the sunset of an entire federal agency, the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC), after six years of existence.

Though sunsetting may appear to be an effective tool for limiting the size of government, in practice sunset provisions have not been very effective, and likely will do little to slow the growth of statutes, agencies, and regulations."

So, although the ban would expire through the inaction of Congress, it is highly unlikely that Congress will let that happen. I read somewhere (I don't know if it is true or not) that Bush and Ashcroft (big surprise from facist Ashcroft) are backing the vote to keep the ban alive.

Certainly nobody has forgotten the ban as the vote to keep it alive is a main topic on a plethora of websites.

Sadly, the ban will probably be around at least as long as you and I.

Link Posted: 9/30/2002 12:04:37 PM EDT
It is getting more likely every day. If either the house or the senate is held by republicans when then sunset takes place, which is just before the 2004 elections, we can expect to have a few months reprieve.

Lets say the rep. do control one or both houses of congress from November of this year to November of 2004. The law will sunset and a new one to replace it will not pass a vote or will not be allowed to come to a vote. This would give us from October of 2004 ( I think that is date the law sunsets) until the Dems control both houses of congress again before a new law can be passed. It usually takes a few months for a new bill to go through comity and hit the floor for a vote. If the Dems win both houses in 04 we could get three to four months of non ban rifles in. If the Rep. win both or one house in 04 we could get two years before another law could be passed. I know I am going to have money ready to buy some lowers.
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 12:17:59 PM EDT
If the ban manages to sunset, I promise you that I will mortgage my home and sell anything I can to invest in items subject to the '94 ban.

Do oyu think it will be enough that the republicans control Congress? I haven't been paying attention but is the issue really that partisan?

I'm afraid that the scaremongering that has gone on will force republicans to sacrifice their seats in order to prevent the law from being extended. I doubt too many legislators are willing to lose their jobs over the issue.

Unfortunately most people seem to think that the assault weapons ban primarily bans fully automatic AK-47s and similar machine guns (even though the machine gun ban is totally separate). A lot of people (including legislators) are apparently under the impression that the assault weapon ban truly only bans weapons designed for mass murdering and drug dealer wars which allegedly have no sporting purpose. I seriously question whether republicans can withstand the political pressure and allow the law to sunset.
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 12:30:24 PM EDT
I cant say for sure that it is that partisan, But when the bill was first passed to law, a lot of Dems lost there seat in the next election. And I do know it was a very hot topic with voters.

Once more I cant say for sure that a Rep. controlled congress will be enough. But I like to think so. The NRA and gun manufacturers could use there lobbies to put some pressure on congress. The NRA while not the best has come up with some wins recently. My be they can keep the ball rolling.

We must keep vigilant with our letters to our representatives, and stay positive.
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 12:33:18 PM EDT
I hope you're right brain. Here's hopin'
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 12:33:44 PM EDT
The reason I mentioned buying lowers is that they are considered the firearm, And if they are manufactured under no ban you could assemble them in to an assault weapon if a new ban took effect.
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 12:53:00 PM EDT
those lowers wont do you one bit of good if you cant prove they were made into a complet rifle befor the ban took place. A lower being made befor the ban does NOT make it pre ban, it has to have been a complete rifle. Of course that is if any new ban is the same as the one we have now.

Link Posted: 9/30/2002 12:53:02 PM EDT
As long as the house and senate go republican the ban would probably not be renewed. If there is an "event" (columbine style) close to the renewal time that could change things.
The biggest roadblock is Bush. He is on record as supporting the ban and he will be in a heated re-election campaign when it's due to sunset. If he's not doing well in the election I'll bet he will use his executive power to keep the ban intact to gain votes and win re-election.
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 1:00:46 PM EDT
Oh those lowers will be assembled. I don't know how one could prove they were, or for that matter how anyone could prove they weren't.

The only way anyone can tell the ones I have now are post ban is buy serial number. How do you prove a lowers is pre ban now? By serial number?
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 2:22:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By thebrain:
The only way anyone can tell the ones I have now are post ban is by serial number. How do you prove a lowers is pre ban now? By serial number?

That's not actually technically correct. A serial number is a good guide, but NOT proof.

For proof, the manufacturer has to confirm that the lower left the factory as part of a complete rifle, or you have to prove (with receipts or pictures I guess) that you owned components to make a full rifle with the lower before the ban went into effect. Many manufacturers sold stripped/complete lowers before 1994, but they will not be able to PROVE that it is pre-ban based on serial number alone. If you own one of those, it is up to you to prove it.

Whether or not you'd ever be in a position to HAVE to prove it is another matter, but do not assume that serial number showing a manufacturing date before 1994 PROVES pre-ban status.
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 4:47:44 PM EDT
Let me ask this about "proof"
It has been repeatedly said that it is your job to prove that a lower was manufactured into an assault rifle before the ban took place.

Does anyone have any legislative or other valid authority to uphold that contention? I mean, possessing an illegal assault weapon is a crime, right? Aren't you innocent until proven guilty? Doesn't the government have the burden of proof? Don't get me wrong, I'm sure you can still be hassled and nobody wants to get arrested even if they are not convicted. I certainly wouldn't suggest that someone do something that will get the ATF knocking on their door.

On the other hand, if you were arrested for a violation of the ban, isn't it the government's job to prove that you committed the crime, not your job to prove your innocence?

I will browse findlaw to see if I can find anything on this but it just doesn't make sense to me that you have to prove your innocence.
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 4:57:28 PM EDT
now, this thread started about a subject thats been beaten to death and has now gone onto another subject thats been beaten to death.

the jist of it is...

1.) this ban or another WILL be put into place if we dont do something (ie letters and voting) i doubt most republicans will vote against another ban. too many soccer moms who have no idea what they are talking about are out there making noise.

2.) nobody is going to arrest you cause you dont have "proof" that your AR15 was in preban form before the ban. generally the serial number will suffice, and even that wont come into play unless YOU do something stupid with your rifle.

thats how i understand these issues at any rate...your mileage may vary.
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 5:01:30 PM EDT
The law "sunsets" in 2004 if not renewed or made permanent. If you want it to end, become a GOP activist. Contribute and vote.
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 7:20:08 PM EDT
even though the original law only passed by a few votes (if that) i believe that even the most pro-gun conservative will not want to open himself to being targeted as "the candidate that endorses dangerous assault weapons" and therefore whatever oppresive replacement those fags cook up will pass...that just what i fear happening.
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 9:04:19 PM EDT
I dont understand. 20 dem seats were lost because they voted for the ban. The ban passed by one vote. Now you all say Repubs will be afraid to let it sunset? I dont see the logic. If PASSING the bill cost dems seats, how could letting it sunset cost the GOP?
Link Posted: 10/1/2002 12:48:44 AM EDT
Well you some politians are stupid, And they have very very short term memory. They forget we put them into office and we can take them out. Remember 2004 is a election year. So write your letters and join the NRA.

I hate people who bitch about gun laws and when you ask them, "Are you in the the NRA" they say Nope.
Link Posted: 10/1/2002 5:27:21 AM EDT
I posted this in another thread yesterday, but it's relevant to this discussion:

For everyone with a defeatist attitude regarding the demise of the"Assault Weapons" ban, read this article.

Quote: "It would be tough, maybe impossible, to pass this in the current Congress, " conceded former Maryland Rep. Michael Barnes, who now heads the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "Lots of members from both parties wouldn't be willing to vote for reauthorization."

This just underscores the importance of your vote in this fall's elections.

Even the antis are admitting it doesn't have much of a chance right now. Vote for pro-gun candidates and join the NRA. There is power in numbers.
Link Posted: 10/1/2002 6:58:18 AM EDT
Lets just hope and pray It goes away. I wonder if it will bring down AR prices. Will I beable to get the AR with the real Tele-Stock (Used) really cheap in October of 2004.
Top Top