Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 9/14/2004 2:46:04 PM EST
I know it's a negative way to look at things but after the AWB "sunset" it's all I hear from people" I cant believe they let them evil machine guns back on the street" and "boy you think them gangsters do bad with the AWB intact, just wait till they get their hands on one of them high capacity CLIPS "and "What does anybody need one of them there 30 round CLIPS for anyway? You don't need one to hunt." I know I'm supposed to educate the ignorant, but damn you just cant get though to some. Some people just know everything and that's the way things are. They think that just because their huntin' rifle isn't being threatened that a gun ban wont hurt them, "the AWB didn't affect them last time". At this rate the "sunset" can't last long. Some are already bitchin about it on TV. I'm starting the early fight. But we already lost once and this time any military style weapons will be illegal to produce. So how long do you think we got?
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 2:47:58 PM EST
38 years.

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 2:49:32 PM EST
there wont be another ban
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 2:50:26 PM EST
Move to NY, you can have one now!
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 2:50:49 PM EST
72 hours and counting
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:22:44 PM EST
I'd like to say that as long as we keep up the pressure on the elected congress critters there won't be a next time, but I've been seeing the same attitudes/impressions/opinions from uniformed sheeple as you. I predict that in 6~9 months some "event" will occur that the Anti-gun crowd can use for an excuse to ban more weapons. Schumer, Feinstein, McCarthy are not the types to give up (as we have seen in the last few months) and as long long as their constituents continue to re-elect them we will always be under a threat. Maybe not an immediate threat , but a threat nonetheless.
JMHO
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:29:06 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 3:43:45 PM EST by Princeton]
I say definitely in the next 5 years.
But then again I was one of those who never believed the assault weapons ban would die. Up until this year I was sure it would be renewed then when nothing happened this summer I became a believer.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:32:20 PM EST
from my experiences with bans in California I would say in 3 to 5 years you will see another
major ban on AW or more restrictions like gun licensing, registration, etc.

I think other states will adopt CA. type bans eventually

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:37:15 PM EST
Don't say "30 round clips". They are High Capacity Bullet Clips.
Please use the correct terminology. Thank you.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:38:37 PM EST

Originally Posted By copper29:
I'd like to say that as long as we keep up the pressure on the elected congress critters there won't be a next time, but I've been seeing the same attitudes/impressions/opinions from uniformed sheeple as you. I predict that in 6~9 months some "event" will occur that the Anti-gun crowd can use for an excuse to ban more weapons. Schumer, Feinstein, McCarthy are not the types to give up (as we have seen in the last few months) and as long long as their constituents continue to re-elect them we will always be under a threat. Maybe not an immediate threat , but a threat nonetheless.
JMHO

6 to 9 months? The "events" are on the news. They don't need an excuse.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:42:56 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:45:19 PM EST
Go get a crystal ball and tell us for certain.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:50:57 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 3:52:57 PM EST by ArmdLbrl]

Originally Posted By Ridge_runner:

Originally Posted By copper29:
I'd like to say that as long as we keep up the pressure on the elected congress critters there won't be a next time, but I've been seeing the same attitudes/impressions/opinions from uniformed sheeple as you. I predict that in 6~9 months some "event" will occur that the Anti-gun crowd can use for an excuse to ban more weapons. Schumer, Feinstein, McCarthy are not the types to give up (as we have seen in the last few months) and as long long as their constituents continue to re-elect them we will always be under a threat. Maybe not an immediate threat , but a threat nonetheless.
JMHO

6 to 9 months? The "events" are on the news. They don't need an excuse.



Some of you people really need to see a shrink. It is not right to get such perverse enjoyment out of the thought that people will try to take things away from you.

And at any rate, it has about as much chance of coming back as alcohol prohibition
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:52:25 PM EST
November 10th, 2004

Chris
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:52:26 PM EST
According to Sarah Brady at The Brady Campaign, "The expiration of this law is temporary. It will be renewed: It is only a matter of how long it will take to renew it.". The scary thing is I believe her and I am sure it will be much sooner than later. Living in New York it does not make much difference but I suspect come January 2005, things are going to start heating up again.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:52:46 PM EST
1st item of bidness for Feinstein in the next legislative session.
Under a (R) controlled congress, an (R) President, not going to pass.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:55:28 PM EST
The Brady Campaign consists of what, six-seven people?

They dont have any support exept for the news stations themselves, who fake everything else.

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:57:12 PM EST
Looks folks, the '94 AWB & Brady didn't appear over nite. It took the anti-gunners approximately 10 years to get it passed, and it was done with some crookiness, and a lot of arm twisting by Bill Clinton.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:00:10 PM EST
Problem is, we have to win every fight and they only have to win once. One good, bloody, school shooting, nationally aired and we are screwed.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:00:18 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 4:06:40 PM EST by copper29]

6 to 9 months? The "events" are on the news. They don't need an excuse.

You are correct on that. The reason for waiting is as usual politics. Few want to cause the demise of their presidential candidates politcal future.
We're already seeing more proposed legislation at the state level so it's only a matter of time.

The bottom line is most of the public are hoplophobes, and haven't a clue about the substance of what they are told to think. Appeal to their emotions by telling them that terrorists will get these weapons easily and viola you have a majority (although I don't think there really is) of the populace wanting a ban on so-called assault weapons. They (TPTB) don't need an excuse they just need a public outcry for governmental intervention.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:00:47 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 4:05:27 PM EST by Ridge_runner]
I guess I don't want to go though that shit again. It was a great win for the RKBA. Once a freedom is lost you never get it back. Is this what getting out of prison is like?lol I just expected champagne to fall from the heavens and people to be dancing in the street.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:06:17 PM EST
No new nationwide ban just a host of state bans that will in effect emasculate gun owners or send them on a "Trail of Tears" exodus to the few remaining states without bans. Eventually they'll make us all move to a reservation and live in old cars. We'll have to sell jewelry made from spent brass and dance around in camo or black tactical for the enjoyment of the tourists. Inbreeding will lower our collective IQs to that of the population at large and then we will be repatriated.

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:12:11 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 4:29:09 PM EST by copper29]

I guess I don't want to go though that shit again. It was a great win for the RKBA. Once a freedom is lost you never get it back.

Agreed. The real win for everyone was that the republicans in congress in '94 wouldn't allow it to pass without a sunset clause. It might have been worse. More reason to make damn certain that more laws have such a clause if applicable. As for the champagne falling from the sky, just go buy a bottle with the money you'll save by paying proper prices for mags etc...


Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:16:02 PM EST

Originally Posted By virginia22:
November 10th, 2004

Chris


Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:17:54 PM EST

Originally Posted By hielo:
Problem is, we have to win every fight and they only have to win once. One good, bloody, school shooting, nationally aired and we are screwed.



+1

I see another ban in less than two years.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:38:09 PM EST

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:

Originally Posted By Ridge_runner:

Originally Posted By copper29:
I'd like to say that as long as we keep up the pressure on the elected congress critters there won't be a next time, but I've been seeing the same attitudes/impressions/opinions from uniformed sheeple as you. I predict that in 6~9 months some "event" will occur that the Anti-gun crowd can use for an excuse to ban more weapons. Schumer, Feinstein, McCarthy are not the types to give up (as we have seen in the last few months) and as long long as their constituents continue to re-elect them we will always be under a threat. Maybe not an immediate threat , but a threat nonetheless.
JMHO

6 to 9 months? The "events" are on the news. They don't need an excuse.



Some of you people really need to see a shrink. It is not right to get such perverse enjoyment out of the thought that people will try to take things away from you.

And at any rate, it has about as much chance of coming back as alcohol prohibition


I don't get any pleasure out of the reality of the situation. I just know how vehemently the anti-gun
crowd wants to see all weapons outlawed. Somehow in their warped sense of reality they think that if everyone is unarmed, sans LEO we'll all be safe. The only "perverse" enjoyment I'm getting lately is watching the likes of Feinstein, brady, et al wriggle at the fact that the ban actually sunsetted.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:52:27 PM EST

Originally Posted By 667:
Don't say "30 round clips". They are High Capacity Bullet Clips.
Please use the correct terminology. Thank you.



? you mean magazines? If you want to be high fallutin you can call them aluminized projectile containment units. But why?
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:58:04 PM EST

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:
The Brady Campaign consists of what, six-seven people?

They dont have any support exept for the news stations themselves, who fake everything else.




They have a pretty big squeal for only 6 or 7 people. Look at all of the national press they get. It's sick that these lying turds are used as a reference at all.

My prediction? Nationally, after January 21st, 2005, all bets are off. State wise? Hold on to your butts!

And yes, we need to keep up the pressure for sure, but I doubt if that will make a difference in the end. Look at what just happened in Kalistan. Eventually it will come down to whether or not you obey these laws.

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:58:19 PM EST
As soon as the Republicans lose the House and presidency.

VOTE!!

(My gut says this will happen sometime after 2008)
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 5:08:13 PM EST
Im taking it one day at a time and spending all my extra cash (well, not really extra) on mags and possibly another lower.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 5:09:25 PM EST
not long

nothing good lasts for long as history has shown, and when something good ends, it ends BAD
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 5:10:14 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 5:12:51 PM EST
We have all of these womens groups that are always yelling choice this and choose that but they are only talking about themselves and it's starting to piss me off.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 5:13:02 PM EST

Originally Posted By Captain_Picard:
No new nationwide ban just a host of state bans that will in effect emasculate gun owners or send them on a "Trail of Tears" exodus to the few remaining states without bans. Eventually they'll make us all move to a reservation and live in old cars. We'll have to sell jewelry made from spent brass and dance around in camo or black tactical for the enjoyment of the tourists. Inbreeding will lower our collective IQs to that of the population at large and then we will be repatriated.





But at least we'll have casinos...
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 5:15:22 PM EST

Originally Posted By shotar:
The next time they will not go after the weapons. They will go after a much simplified law that bans magazines over a certain capacity. It will be easier to define, easier to stump for, and easier to push through. No cosmetic arguments, just a straight outright ban on magazines. At that point our entire argument will be reduced to why we want a certain number of rounds without reloading. The contitutional argument will fall on deaf ears. The only thing left then is sporting. Remember that the national match rules require a mag the same size as military so thats at least a 20. That is the only hope.





I'm afraid you're exactly right. Banning guns will prove to be extraordinarily difficult. Banning hi-cap mags will be relatively easy to accomplish.

Unfortunately, I expect this to happen during the next democratic presidency...
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 5:39:22 PM EST
I remember one politician saying, "We can never get all their guns, but we can take away their bullets." His idea was to tax ammo so no one could afford it. Metzenbaum?

""The expiration of this law is temporary. It will be renewed: It is only a matter of how long it will take to renew it.""

They can't renew what does not exist. They will have to write a new law from scratch. Last time it barely got in by 2 votes, and only because they cheated and did not end voting when the clock ran out. Then two years later a REPEAL made it through the house. Do you know how rare a repeal is? How difficult?

There is no widespread support among the politicians, and we are MUCH better informed and organized than last time.

Back then you still had the hunter/skeet crowd that still thought they were only banning machine guns, and it would not affect their sport. Now many of them know that after they throw this baby off the sleigh (homeland defense rifles) that theirs are next.
Top Top