Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 1/16/2002 6:38:19 PM EDT
I hav'nt seen a single post anywhere dealing with the subject, but Feb. '02 is the end of the AW Ban timeframe as originally decreed by Clinton and his pals. What are the odds? Anyone believe that anything will change for the better or worse? [8] loose-round
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 6:41:25 PM EDT
I thought that was 2/2/04
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 6:49:42 PM EDT
Yep! 04!
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 6:54:12 PM EDT
September 13, 2004.
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 6:56:40 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Locobob: September 13, 2004.
View Quote
Sept. 13, 1994.... A date which will live in infamy....
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 6:56:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/16/2002 6:57:20 PM EDT by SWIRE]
EFFECTIVE AND TERMINATION DATES OF 1994 AMENDMENT Amendment by sections 110102(c) and 110103(c) of Pub. L. 103-322 repealed 10 years after Sept. 13, 1994, I will tell you this though. If you want to ban to sunset in 2004, 2 months before the general elections, then we need to stop the gun control advocates in the 2002 election so they will be too scared to bring up gun control. A recent poll shows that public opinion of the Republicans has shifted from 50% to 61%. Redistricting will also help the Republicans. A strong Republican President will help the Republicans. More people seeing the need for guns, will help the Republicans. However, we must make sure that gun right advocats are elected all everywhere in 2002. Donate time and money to pro-gun candidates. Join a state level gun organization to help them back candidates. We have everything going for us and it's our own fault if we lose. If the AW ban is renewed the blame falls squarely on gun owners who did not get off their asses. If gun owners don't make noise about this, then why would the people in congress risk their jobs fighting the AW ban? We know the other side is going to make a huge stink about it, we must also.
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 7:05:43 PM EDT
Post from SWIRE -
I will tell you this though. If you want to ban to sunset in 2004, 2 months before the general elections, then we need to stop the gun control advocates in the 2002 election so they will be too scared to bring up gun control.
View Quote
If we win in 2002, then the renewal of the AW Ban will never make it out of Congress to receive President Bush's signature or veto, therefore he will not have to risk signing an anti-gun measure that will demoralize and alienate his base. So in order to win in 2004, we must strive to win big in 2002! Taking back the Senate would be a good start! Get started, push for pro-gun Republican candidates. If you don't support a pro-gun GOP candidate in the primaries, don't complain to us when the GOP candidate who's running in November is not to your liking!
We have everything going for us and it's our own fault if we lose. If the AW ban is renewed the blame falls squarely on gun owners who did not get off their asses. If gun owners don't make noise about this, then why would the people in congress risk their jobs fighting the AW ban?
View Quote
Pay attention to [b]SWIRE[/b], he's right as rain on this boys! Eric The(Pro-Republican)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 8:41:52 PM EDT
Better make that "Libertarian candidates" instead of "gun-banning Republican 'pro-gun' closet commie candidates". Otherwise you'll just end up with Henry Hyde again, and anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together knows what he did to us in 1993-94.
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 8:55:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/16/2002 8:56:47 PM EDT by DarkHelmet]
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 9:15:28 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 9:26:45 PM EDT
If you notice I did say pro-gun candidates. There are some Dems who are more pro-gun than Republicans. For example in my House district, Democrat John Dingell, the US Rep that was strip searched at the airport, actually proposed a gun bill with only half the restrictions of what the Republicans where asking for. Because he did that, he effectively stalled both bills. Now if there was only some way to whip the Senate in shape. Talk about a bunch of POS Republicans, McCain for example.
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 9:33:59 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 9:47:20 PM EDT
Get started, push for pro-gun Republican candidates.
View Quote
Whipping out the ol' checkbook ain't a bad idea, too. If your state's candidates are already shoo-ins, never hurts send a few bucks to a candidate in a cliff-hanger state! (Think "Senator Rick Lazzio" instead of "Senator Hillary Clinton")
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 9:54:41 PM EDT
SWIRE - do you mind if I quote you on rec.guns? Thats a huge group that should be reminded of what you stated. Or, maybe you could post it there yourself.
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 10:12:08 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed: Better make that "Libertarian candidates" instead of "gun-banning Republican 'pro-gun' closet commie candidates". Otherwise you'll just end up with Henry Hyde again, and anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together knows what he did to us in 1993-94.
View Quote
in the primaries it will be better to scare an anti-gun republican into seeing it our way. threaten him with loss of votes. Henry Hyde you blow [}:D] lib
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 11:04:44 PM EDT
Well... wonder of wonders... Glad to see some of our 'gun culture' brethren are getting the point that the repudicrats ain't necessarily any more on the side of Our Cause than *many* of the demopubs... Personally I despise them ten X's more... (at least the demopubs who are anti's are generally honest enough to admit it)... IMO The REAL problem is with those repudicratic back stabbing b*st*rds who profess to support Our Cause... But are weak and only feign allegiance... And don't even get me started on the OTHER Rights the repudicrats regularly like to trample on... OCTJMO... ICBW... db
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 4:07:58 AM EDT
That's all very nice to push for [b]pro-gun Democrat[/b] candidates, as well....[b]NOT![/b] John 'Show Us Your Scar' Dingell will vote along with his DEMO compadres should the DEMOS ever take the House, to give us liberal DEMO House Committee Chairmen. See where THAT takes this Country! If Dingell were a true patriot, he would bolt his party the way Phil Gramm did back in 1981, resign his seat, and run for the same seat as a Republican and win it (just as Gramm did!). Otherwise, he's just a less objectionable DEMO congresscritter. Just like Sen. McCain is a less objectionable Republican than Jeffords turned out to be! But not by much! Eric The(ThePartyWins-ItGetsToDoleOutTheFruitsOfVictory)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 4:20:42 AM EDT
I wish it was 2002
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 6:42:44 AM EDT
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: That's all very nice to push for [b]pro-gun Democrat[/b] candidates, as well....[b]NOT![/b] John 'Show Us Your Scar' Dingell will vote along with his DEMO compadres should the DEMOS ever take the House, to give us liberal DEMO House Committee Chairmen. See where THAT takes this Country! Eric The(ThePartyWins-ItGetsToDoleOutTheFruitsOfVictory)Hun[>]:)]
View Quote
You sir are an IDIOT. Remember this, it's better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are an idiot instead of opening it and proving it. The Dingell family, that's right there's more than one in politics, is more pro-gun than most of the Republicans. A certain member of their family, a State Senator, can be seen at almost every shooting competition in the area participating, including high power shooting matchs with an AR-15. Is it too hard for you to comprehend the fact that there is a pro-gun Democrat who owns and shoots assault weapons with high capacity magazines?
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 6:49:30 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Libertoon: in the primaries it will be better to scare an anti-gun republican into seeing it our way. threaten him with loss of votes. He lib
View Quote
When it comes to firearms rights, MUCH of my correspondence with my Congress critters contains some form of THREAT of loss of votes, and that i will actively work to unseat them if they vote anti-rights. Force - its the language of the politician.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 8:22:27 AM EDT
Post from SWIRE -
You sir are an IDIOT. Remember this, it's better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are an idiot instead of opening it and proving it.
View Quote
Thanks for your kind comments, but if you believe that John Dingell will not vote for his DEMO buddies as Chairmen of House Committees if and when the DEMOS are successful in regaining the House they lost in 1994, then you, Sir, are the IDIOT! And how does it help the RKBA cause if there are nothing but liberal Democrats in charge of all the House Committees? Huh? Can you say 'BRADY II' Mr. Dingell? Hmmmm? Can you say 'Extension of AW Ban Before It Expires in 2004' Mr. Dingell? Maybe you should ask Rep Dingell that the next time you go shooting with him!
The Dingell family, that's right there's more than one in politics, is more pro-gun than most of the Republicans.
View Quote
Good, then tell them to change their party affiliation to a party that has not been taken over by anti-gun zealots! You know, the Party of Hillary, Schumer, et nauseum.
A certain member of their family, a State Senator, can be seen at almost every shooting competition in the area participating, including high power shooting matchs with an AR-15.
View Quote
And yet he belongs to a Party that has dedicated itself to making certain that the ordinary citizens, you know, the People, are denied the use, ownership, or possession of those very weapons! Hmmm, do I smell hypocracy? That's all very nice, I'm certain that there is more than one fowling piece at the Kennedy Compound in Massachusettes, as well.
Is it too hard for you to comprehend the fact that there is a pro-gun Democrat who owns and shoots assault weapons with high capacity magazines?
View Quote
No, not that he is permitted to own it, possess it, use it, etc., but it does surprise me that he belongs to a Party that seeks to have all those rights and previleges removed from the rest of us! Gee, thanks alot Dingell! BTW, just ask Congresscritter Dingell, his pro-gun family, and State Senator Dingell if they all (1) voted for Al Gore in 2000, (2) gave money to the Democrat National Committee in 2000, or since, (3) intend to vote Democrat in the 2002 Mid-term Election, and (4) intend to vote to re-elect George W. in the 2004 Election? Their answers will tell you who they really are, and whether they value sacred rights over petty party politics. Eric The(GetTheBigPicture,Son?)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 8:38:07 AM EDT
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: Post from SWIRE -
You sir are an IDIOT. Remember this, it's better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are an idiot instead of opening it and proving it.
View Quote
Thanks for your kind comments..... Eric The(GetTheBigPicture,Son?)Hun[>]:)]
View Quote
Excellent !! Meaningul and fruitful dialog. Now we're making progress. [smoke]
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 5:32:14 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 6:20:31 PM EDT
I know the assualt ban will sunset. I have spent too much money on guns! I bought Qualcomm just in time to hit the slide. Same with SUNW and MSFT. So with my luck, the ban will sunset and I will have a bunch of guns that will have lost more then half their value. But I love every last one!
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 6:22:47 PM EDT
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: Can you say 'BRADY II' Mr. Dingell? Hmmmm? Can you say 'Extension of AW Ban Before It Expires in 2004' Mr. Dingell?
View Quote
Let's see, your in Texas and your telling me how anti-gun Dingell is or could be. Just because someone is a Dem doesn't mean they are or will ban anti-gun. Mr. Dingell voted against everything the first time around, as shown below. But a quick summary he, voted against Brady, against AW ban, and against banning imports of AWs. If Mr. Dingell is nothing but an anti-gunner Dem, then why did Mr. Dingell not only break with his own party when the House was working on "common sense gun laws" after Columbine, but introduce legislation with half the restrictions of the Republicans? The pussies in the Senate had already sold us out. President Clinton was calling for the House to do something, beating the Republicans up every second they go. The House Republicans introduced a bill that would allow for a 3 day background check for all purchases at gun shows and were close to passing. Then Mr. Dingell stepped up and said F*** everyone, and introduced legislation that allowed for only a max of 24 hours for a background check and said the background check system needed to be improved not the time extended. The Republicans in the House liked this bill better than the one they introduced and for that instead, knowing full well that difference between the 3day provision in the Senate bill and the 24 provision in the House bill would most likely keep the bill in committee where it will and did die. Now, tell me again how Mr. Dingell will sell us out under pressure and how the Republicans will stand strong and defend our rights? Dingell has an A- rating from Gun Owners of America, that says something right there. Let's take a look at Dingell's voting record on gun issues. This came from an anti-gun organziation. J. Dingell (D) Y Y N Y N N Vote #1 - October 4, 1990. Rep. Unsoeld's (D-WA) amendment which would strike from the crime bill provisions for a ban on the importation of assault rifles into the U.S. Unsoeld's amendment passed 257 - 172. The Coalition opposed the amendment. Vote #2 - May 8, 1991. Rep. Staggers' (D-WV) amendment for a handgun waiting period and a dealer hot line which would provide instant criminal background checks at the time a weapon is purchased. Staggers' amendment failed 193 - 234. The Coalition opposed the Staggers' bill as a substitute for the Brady bill. Vote #3 - May 8, 1991. The Brady bill which would provide for a seven-day waiting period for handgun purchases. The Brady bill passed 239 - 186. The Coalition supported the Brady bill. Vote #4 - October 17, 1991. Rep. Volkmer's (D-MO) amendment to strike provisions prohibiting the ownership or sale of certain assault weapons from the crime bill. The Volkmer amendment passed 247 - 177. The Coalition opposed the amendment. Vote #5 - September 30, 1993. Rep. Maloney's (D-NY) amendment which would have cut $2.5 million from the army's Division of Civilian Markmanship program which teaches shooting. The amendment failed 190 - 242. The Coalition supported the amendment. Vote #6 - November 10, 1993. The Brady bill which would provide for a five-day waiting period for handgun purchases. The Brady bill passed 236 - 189. The Coalition supported the bill.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 8:10:47 PM EDT
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: And how does it help the RKBA cause if there are nothing but liberal Democrats in charge of all the House Committees? Huh? Can you say 'BRADY II' Mr. Dingell? Hmmmm? Can you say 'Extension of AW Ban Before It Expires in 2004' Mr. Dingell? Eric The(GetTheBigPicture,Son?)Hun[>]:)]
View Quote
Can you say... VETO! I sure as hey ain't holding me breath fer Dubya to... For a historical perspective... don't forget Papa Bush's unilateral AW ban... OCTJMIO... ICBW... db PS: If the repudicrats are so supportive of Our Cause how come they haven't rolled back a SINGLE anti-gun reg when they've had the chance... and they have IMO... For a historical perspective on this go back and do a little research on who did... and more important WHO did NOT... co-sponsor the first Chenoweth bill to repeal the Lautenberg amendment... to get ya started I'll name you two that ought to get yer dander up... Bobby Barr... and Willy Archer...
Top Top