Posted: 11/4/2004 4:18:03 AM EDT
| What's the deal? Why's it still in effect? Why don't we try to get rid of it now that the AWB is gone? |
Because the the government has the right to control commercial imports. It was an easy kill done by Daddy Bush under pressure. Most of it is perfectly constitutional, the only part being not is the part about retro configuring. It's important to note that the '94 was not actively eliminated by anybody. It sunset gracefully as that was a part of the code. Nobody lifted a finger to do anything, thus don't fool yourself into thinking that there is a pro black rifle movement in the house or senate. Edited to add: It's the old 'sproting purposes thing'. The '89 is similar to what the '94 was, EXCEPT that you couldn't have ANY evil features. The '94 allowed 1, which is what got you a pistol grip on an AR and a FS on a M1A. |
there may not be, but we CAN start a movement to get it removed. If it was an easy placement, then it should be an easy removal.
|
It's still around because the anti's have graphic images of many dead children in a school which is the event the sparked the 89 ban. To repeal the 89 ban would be to say that you want to have school children murdered...at least that is how the anti's, liberals, and media would play it. Even with the Republican's controlling everything there is no way they would try to repeal the 89 ban because of all the "school children murderer" press they would get. |
|
I guess i'm already ahead on the game, have already sent out letters and email today regarding this. Shortly going to be putting something regarding it on the-gunsmith.com to get more attention brought to it. Fact is we may not be a majority, but we as the most stalwart part of the gun lobby have a great deal of political power. I think Bush's re-election proved this to a degree and he damn well knows it. It'll take 5 minutes out of your time.. So get off your asses, Write letters, Send Emails, Make Phone calls.. and lets push for this.. it really can happen. The Civil Rights Movement worked for the most part.. SO.. ON WITH THE GUN RIGHTS MOVEMENT!!! |
In my opinion it would be much better to go after the 86 ban on new machine guns and the 69 "sporting purpose" clause. The 89 ban is based on the 69 sporting purpose as those items were banned for not having a sporting purpose. So in theory if the 69 ban goes away then the 89 ban would no longer be valid. |
hmmm. that's interesting. Very interesting, in fact. Know any lawyers who could prove something like that? Because if it is true, then I'm in agreement to go after the sporting purpose clause, but we need to be SURE! |
According to our opponents, the Brady Group: Under the Reagan Administration, the ATF blocked the importation of certain models of shotguns that were not suitable for sporting purposes. In 1989, during the George H.W. Bush Administration, the ATF expanded this list to permanently ban the importation of 43 types of semi-automatic assault rifles that were also determined not to have a sporting purpose. Later, in 1998, President Clinton banned the importation of 58 additional foreign-made "copycat" assault weapons in order to close a loophole in the prior import ban. |
However, it did take an active effort to make sure it was allowed to sunset. Thanks to all who wrote to Congress on that one! 
|
+1 |
I think the first and most obtainable goal should be to get mil surplus ammo and magazines sold again. Frankly, I don't understand why that Clintoon EO wasn't rescinded the first week W was in office. |
Yep. The 89 ban is an Executive Order using the GCA of 68 as its authority. Perfectly legal. The easiest way to kill the 89 ban is for W to rescind the EO that created it. The 94 ban went away and the streets did not run red with blood. So it will be with the 89. |
OK, fair enough, we are ALL concerned about outsourcing. What do you propose to fix the problem? How does Bush prevent your boss from hiring an Asian to do your programming for 20% of your cost? Your product doesen't even have any shipping cost. Seriously. |
Not to hijack this thread, but I'm an IT professional and I have NEVER had any problems remaining employed. Employer's pay for quality. Any company that wants to outsource my job (that would be an interesting thing to try) to India isn't a company I'd want to work for anyway. There is NO shortage of IT jobs in this country (look at how many are posted on monster.com alone) if you are willing to relocate. |
Perhaps, but which do you think has a greater chance of happening before they serve icr cream in hell. Be easier to get reps to go along with the 89 ban than "let machine guns loose on the streets into school yards and churches" S.O. |
|
By the time it gets reversed, I'll have finished 922r conversions on everything I want. BTW, I find this law amusing in the 'unintended consequences' catagory. In doing the conversion work on my AKs and fixing the bodged conversion on my CETME, I've actually learned a fair amount about gunsmithing and gun design. Also, the law has had the effect of creating a pretty substantial domestic industry for rifle fabricators and gun parts. Both are positive. It should be reversed, but it has had its positive impact. If the liberals knew anything at all about the actual firearms industry, it would drive them nuts. |