Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/23/2002 4:31:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/23/2002 4:33:56 PM EDT by Supershooter]
[url]http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/prime/0919-134.html[/url] Law Enforcement Groups to Announce Support for Reauthorizing Federal Assault Weapons Ban; Ban Will Expire in 2004 To: National Desk Contact: Amy Stilwell of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, 202-898-0792 Major law enforcement groups will gather in the nation's capital on Monday, September 23, to express their strong support for the renewal of the federal Assault Weapons Ban, which is scheduled to expire in September 2004, unless Congress passes legislation to renew it. The Assault Weapons Ban was passed as part of the 1994 Crime Bill. The law required domestic manufacturers to stop production of semiautomatic assault weapons, such as UZIs and AK-47s, and ammunition clips holding more than 10 rounds except for military or police use. Many Americans do not know that the Assault Weapons ban will expire in 2004, and that the federal lawmakers elected to Congress this November will decide whether this life-saving law remains in effect. Assault weapons like AK-47s pose a serious threat to our communities and to our public safety officials. The clock is ticking and we must act now to ensure that this legislation is not allowed to expire. Join leaders of our national law enforcement organizations to learn how the federal Assault Weapons Ban will affect our communities and neighborhoods if it is allowed to expire in September 2004, and to hear their united voice in support of reauthorizing this critical law. [b]Read on and try to hold down your supper[/b]
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 5:11:14 PM EDT
Most of the 'major law enforcement groups' that support this crap are made up of politically motivated chiefs, not line troops. There are a number of law enforcement groups made up of actual cops who are actively working against things like renewing the ban. Unfortunately the chiefs can do their campaigning for this crap on duty time, while us flatfeet would get fired for arguing against it on the company clock. Some officers have even been disciplined for speaking out against gun control on their own time, as their opinion ran counter to the 'official line' of their agency.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 5:17:04 PM EDT
Well the meeting was held today Monday 23 September. Did it even make the news?? Badredfish [devil]
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 5:18:58 PM EDT
[url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=144894[/url]
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 6:19:40 PM EDT
Here's the thing. This isn't just about Congress re-passing the legislation, it is also about GWB signing it into law. The President will have the decision of signing it into law or vetoing it. If he vetos the bill, then Congress will have to revote, and pass the legislation with a 2/3 vote (and I doubt that much bipartisan support would occur on this subject). So the goal is to not only convince Congress not to introduce and pass legislation, but also to convince George W. to veto the bill and let the ASB expire should Congress pass a reup. The voters will have much more leverage over the President than the Congress, since the ASB will expire in September and the presidential election will occur shortly thereafter in November (that's short-term political memory). We have to convince the President that signing a renewal of the ban into law could cost him his re-election. So, here's the big question: how many people who would normally vote Republican will vow either to vote for the Democratic presidential candidate, vote Independent, or abstain from voting altogether, should GWB sign a renewal into law?
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 8:52:30 PM EDT
George Bush has already said he would sign it. Voting Democrat would just get the more advanced version signed.
Link Posted: 9/23/2002 10:07:26 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: George Bush has already said he would sign it. Voting Democrat would just get the more advanced version signed.
View Quote
Hmmm... I wonder why Att. Gen. Ashcroft bother to send that letter to the NRA saying that he(this administration) supports the "right to keep and bear arms?" I guess in all of the giddyness of winning the presidential election they just go carried away. I guess Bush forgot the support that the NRA gave him, I guess its going to be "like father like son." For me personally, I'm going to try to keep Bushes feet to the fire whenever I can, to get him to change his mind.
Link Posted: 9/24/2002 12:43:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/24/2002 12:44:38 AM EDT by Imbroglio]
Originally Posted By warlord: Hmmm... I wonder why Att. Gen. Ashcroft bother to send that letter to the NRA saying that he(this administration) supports the "right to keep and bear arms?"
View Quote
"[b]Bush opposed repeal of the 1994 assault weapon ban[/b] and indicated his openness to Clinton’s call to raise the age of legal handgun ownership from 18 to 21." -L.A. Times May 1, 1999 "Bush expressed support for some gun control measures, [b]including the ban on assault weapons[/b]"- The Washington Post Apr 25, 1999 "Bush said he supported efforts in the Republican-led Congress to raise the legal age for purchase of a handgun to 21 from 18 and to [b]ban large ammunition clips[/b]."- Reuters, “Bush favors raising.” Aug 27, 1999 "Maintain state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms."- Vote Smart NPAT 1998 Jul 2, 1998 "And the President would also [b]ban importation of high-capacity ammunition clips, and close the gun show loophole.[/b]"- Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer, February 6, 2001 "[The 2nd Amendment] does not mean that [b]reasonable restrictions[/b] cannot be imposed to prevent unfit persons from possessing firearms or to [b]restrict possession of firearms particularly suited to criminal misuse.[/b]" - In a November 9, 2001 memo appended to 2 briefs to the Supreme Court urging them not to hear Haney or Emerson
Link Posted: 9/24/2002 6:55:43 AM EDT
It amazes me that Bush can be so behind "Homeland Defense" and yet at the same time, so willing to take away the right of law-abiding Americans to own weapons for the purpose of defending their homes. "Homeland Defense" BEGINS at HOME. And by the way: since when do criminals obey gun laws, anyway?
Link Posted: 9/24/2002 7:14:59 AM EDT
iiioxx...you'd thik that homeland defense would begin with civilans. however, i think that the government believes that homeland defense starts with the federal police forces with the military included if the SHTF in a big way. in thier eyes us good citizens just need sit back, cooperate, pay our taxes and let the "professionals" take care of us.
Top Top