Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 2/28/2002 3:44:13 PM EDT
our legislators/overlords will allow the AW Ban to sunset?
Link Posted: 2/28/2002 3:49:49 PM EDT
I will be surprised if they do. Some pinhead will screw things up by killing bunch of people.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 6:35:21 PM EDT
It will sunset no matter what. The interesting question will be if it is replaced by a new law. But, either way the Pre-Ban/Post-Ban Date will shift. If a new law is passed, anything made before that date would be Pre-Ban. But, it wouldn't have been lawfully possessed. If it is repassed in such a form, it may be possible for FFLs to make a shitload of SAWs before then and sell them once the 1st law expires as Pre-Bans. But, if the law lapses then we can add all the evil features we want. My money is on it lapsing. Those who say it will be renewed are ignorant of what happened in 1994. In 1994, the law passed by 1 vote in an overwhelmingly liberal congress. Weeks later, many of those same congressmen were looking for new jobs. We now control the house. We may or may not take the senate this year. But, as long as we mantain control of the house, any renewal is DOA. In the house, Tom DeLay decides what goes on the Calendar to eb voted on. I expect a Pro-Gun Texan like DeLay to kill the bill on arrival. It will never make it on the calendar. Politics is alot more complicated than many think. In order to pass a new law, all of the following must happen: 1) It must be written and contain the proper wording. 2) It must be read twice and submitted to the proper comitee. 3) It must make it out of comiteee. 4) It must be placed on the Calendar for a vote of the entire House. Tom DeLay R-Texas controls what goes on the calendar. 5) It must be voted for by a majority of the house of representatives. 6) It must be fowarded to the senate. 7) If the senate changes one word, it must go to commitee. 8) Differences between house and senate versions must be hamemred out and both side must agree on a single version of the bill. 9) It must be brought to the senate floor. 10) All proposed amendments must be voted on. 11) It must not be fillibustered. 12) It must be voted for by a mjority of the Senate. 13) It must be fowarded to the President for approval. 14) President George W. Bush, a Republican Gun Owner from Texas must sign the bill.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 6:38:36 PM EDT
No. Schnertus exceedus mozga ti doma planet Uranus ineptus topicus
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 6:51:39 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cc48510: 14) President George W. Bush, a Republican Gun Owner from Texas must sign the bill.
View Quote
Hopefully it won't make it to this point, cause if it does, he will. He's said so.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 7:45:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2002 8:53:57 PM EDT by sulaco]
Do you think we will still be in control of the house when it comes time to Judge the 1994 AWB?
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 8:23:23 PM EDT
What does Jude mean ? If you are asking if we will control the house on Sept. 14, 2004. The answer is a huge yes. Redistricting is in our favor. Anti-Gun states such as New York are losing seats and Pro-Gun states such as Florida, Arizona, etc...are gaining seats. New York is notorious for producing Anti-Gun trash. No offense to GB, et al. But, a couple of NY Congressmen will be looking for new jobs come next January. They have lost 2 seats regardless of how the election goes. Florida will also gain 2 seats. I heard the Rep. Leg. will be creating new congressional districts in Seminole County and Little Havana. Seminole County is on our side. Little Havana is Republican. But, that is about as far as they go. The only upside from giving Little Havana another district is that we will have 1 more Republican in Congress albeit a Gun Grabber in the image of Ros-Leithen and Diaz Balart. Also, we are supposed to be eliminating a district in Palm Beach. I have my fingers crossed that either Duetsche or Wexler will be looking for a new job due to redistricting. The ban will sunset Sept. 14, 2004. Election Day is Nov. 2, 2004. The ban sunsets 1 month and 2 weeks before the 2004 election. BTW, Bush did not say he would renew the 94 AW Ban. He said he would sign any ban on juvenille possession of AWs. Hell, even John "The 2nd is an Individual Right" Ashcroft voted to make Juvenille Possession of AWs illegal when he was in Congress. From what I can tell our best chance is in the House. The Senate has yet to see a new law it doesn't like. It will be even worse with the likes of Elizabeth "Who Needs An AK-47" Dole in office. I may be the only one here who believes Bush wouldn't sign a Genral AW Ban. He might sign a more limited version, though. I see this as about the only chance they have to renew it. Any new bill will have to be restrictions rather than an outright ban to be passed. For example, if they required you to be 21 to buy an AR-15, AK-47, etc...or if they created a waiting period to buy AKs, etc...But, a general ban such as we have now has a snowballs chance in hell of getting out of the House. I believe the Democrats if they are smart enough will write a new bill that would be more likely to pass. Any new bill would likely contain: 1) Further Import Restrictions. If that is even possible. Importing Guns has pretty much been made illegal since laws and regs. were passed in 1968 (MG Import Ban), 1989 (AW Import Ban), 1990 (922(r)), 1998 (Ban on all Hi-Cap Imports), and 2000 (Barrel Bans). 2) Possible New Lisence for Dealers who sell AWs. This would effectively make it harder to find AR-15s and AK-47s since many dealers who carry only an occassional AW would simply not carry or Transfer any more AWs. 3) Possible increase in the age to buy an AW from 18 to 21. 4) A New Hi-Capacity Magazine Ban. The provisions that make it illegal to use an AW in a violent crime won't sunset. So, it is unlikely that the AW Ban will be renewed. But, I can see the Hi-Capacity Ban be renewed.
Originally Posted By sulaco: Do you think we will still be in control of the house when it comes time to Jude the 1994 AWB?
View Quote
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 9:05:18 PM EDT
Thanks for the answer cc48510,
1) Further Import Restrictions. If that is even possible. Importing Guns has pretty much been made illegal since laws and regs. were passed in 1968 (MG Import Ban), 1989 (AW Import Ban), 1990 (922(r)), 1998 (Ban on all Hi-Cap Imports), and 2000 (Barrel Bans).
View Quote
Maybe you can answer this, what’s the point of import restrictions on firearms that are allowed to be made domestically? And what about replacement parts, with the 2000 restriction I can’t buy a replacement barrel for my import?
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 9:30:08 PM EDT
Actually, with 922(r), you cannot build a non-importable gun with more than 10 foreign parts from a specific list of 20 parts. But, the restrictions make it more exepensive. For example, they add on $90 to the cost of an FAL. The Barrel Ban is actually an import restriction. At this time, you can get newly imported barrels and do whatever with them. But, the importer has to mark "For Replacement Parts Only". You are correct though about domestic production. In most cases, the result is that the guns are made here at a higher price. For example, a US FAL Lower costs $100 and Fire Controls cost $50. An original imported lower with imported fire controls costs $30. All it serves to do is drive up the price. Ever wonder why importable AKs cost $170, while non-importable AKs cost $300 - 400 ? The 1968 Law banned the importation of MGs. I do not understand why anybody ever imported a Pre-May Dealer Sample. But, in 1986 Domestic Production was banned. Then, in 1989 AW Importation was banned. This was the original AW Definiton. But, several companies brought in kits and assembled them here. So, in 1990 building an unimportable gun from a majority of imported parts (11 out of 20) became illegal. So, in 1990 they gen putting Butthole stocks on guns and importing them. This is what MAK-90 stands for Modified AK of 1990. Then, in 1998 by Decree Klinton banned the import of any Hi-Capacity Capable Semi-Automatic. So, now comapnies had to use 10 or less foreign parts. So, comapnies here began making gun with US Parts. Most were decent. Some were crap (Special Weapons, Century, Hesse, etc...). Then in 2000, the government decided to exercise its power to ban the import of barrels except for replacement parts. So, importers have to now mark "For Replacement Parts Only" on parts kits. But, as of yet there is no law to make it illegal for the consumer to build on the kits. I expect one (a law) to eventually come along. Did the AW Ban make it impossible to get a legal AW ? No. It drove up the price. Similarly, the Import laws were solely intended to drive up prices. It is sickening once you realize a FA AK-47 only costs $5 in Sub-Saharan Africa, but a Semi-Auto w/ no evil features costs $400 here.
Originally Posted By sulaco: Thanks for the answer cc48510,
1) Further Import Restrictions. If that is even possible. Importing Guns has pretty much been made illegal since laws and regs. were passed in 1968 (MG Import Ban), 1989 (AW Import Ban), 1990 (922(r)), 1998 (Ban on all Hi-Cap Imports), and 2000 (Barrel Bans).
View Quote
Maybe you can answer this, what’s the point of import restrictions on firearms that are allowed to be made domestically? And what about replacement parts, with the 2000 restriction I can’t buy a replacement barrel for my import?
View Quote
Link Posted: 3/5/2002 9:45:05 AM EDT
What happens if the bill sunsets but a new bill is not yet ready? Would it be game on for companies to produce Hi caps again? and AR's
Link Posted: 3/5/2002 10:27:07 AM EDT
1911greg has a good point. If they do not have a new bill ready, is there anyway they could "extend" the '94 ban untill a new bill was ready ?
Link Posted: 3/6/2002 11:46:27 AM EDT
I hope not You know the gun companies can make a shit load of mags in a short period just like before the mag ban, just wait give them a chance and they will replenish the market with plenty of hi caps! why does a bill sunset ? is it required after a certain amount of years?
Link Posted: 3/6/2002 11:50:56 AM EDT
The aw ban had a special clause in it that it expired in 10 years.
Link Posted: 3/6/2002 12:12:26 PM EDT
Once a law passes, even if it expires, I think it would still be very difficult to get rid of it. Somehow they will find a way to renew it, and probably add more evil features to the list (Post-ban II), like black or gray colors, synthetic stocks, removable magazines, semi-automatic, etc.
Top Top