Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
Posted: 5/11/2002 8:55:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/11/2002 8:58:06 PM EDT by DaveTX]
I understand that if you buy "evil" parts for your postban AR but don't install them, that you can legally install them the day of the AW sunset and take a time-dated pic of it for legal proof.

This seems simple enough, but what if another AW ban is passed? Then is your formally post-ban AR now a "pre-ban" if you have a pic of it with evil features installed right after the sunset? Can you add evil features to it after this?

Also, I would like to buy a preban M4 upper in preparation for the ban. Since I would like to legally shoot it in the meantime, is there anything simple and CHEAP I can do to legally "disable" the flash suppressor so I can fire it on my postban and then modify it back? I know this is probably impossible since it still has the bayo lug - but what if this were filed off? I would like to have a bayo lug for show but honestly I would have zero use for it. Any suggestions?

(BTW, No I am not willing to illegally fire a preban upper on my postban lower)
Link Posted: 5/11/2002 9:00:32 PM EDT
You would also have to disable the bayonette lug too. Which means cutting it off. Which means you no longer have a evil M4 upper.
Link Posted: 5/11/2002 11:12:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/11/2002 11:25:40 PM EDT by JAFO]
I suggest stocking up on currently "post-ban" stuff. I can only see them making even stricter laws and enacting them BEFORE the AW ban sunsets.

Soon you will be limited to 5 rd mags. The price of 10 round mags will quadruple. Rifle barrels will have a 24 inch minimum, to make it harder to conceal your AR in your back pocket ;) Surplus ammo will be ordered destroyed, and the importation illegal. Maybe they'll limit firearm quantities too. You can only have one firearm for each intended purpose. One rifle for big game, one shotgun for small game, one handgun for personal defense, etc.

I could see Big Brother thinking with the attitude that once they get the limit down to 5 rd mags, JBT's will be able to operate in smaller groups to invade your home and take away your naughty toys.

You can scorn me, or you can realize that this CAN happen, and get ready to start writing to your elected representatives :)

Edited to add: The flash supressor itself isn't the only pre-ban "assault weapon" feature. The fact that the barrel is threaded is a no-no according to the law.

"(iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor"

So removing the flash hider wouldn't make it legal to use on a post-ban rifle if that barrel COULD still accept a functional flash hider.

About getting these pre-ban accessories before the ban "sunsets", I don't think it would be wise to even own them if you don't have a pre-ban lower.

This of course is just my opinion.
Link Posted: 5/11/2002 11:18:17 PM EDT
so would the pic with the date on itbe a
proof of legit?
Link Posted: 5/11/2002 11:29:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MAC-DADDY:
so would the pic with the date on itbe a
proof of legit?



Even if this scenario were remotely realistic, dated photos probably wouldn't hold up in court. You program cameras to have a certain date. I would imagine photo processors could make the date say anything they wanted on prints. If you wanted something possibly legal to prove the date, perhaps you could run your photo to the notary public and have them stamp it. lol
Link Posted: 5/11/2002 11:30:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DaveTX:
I understand that if you buy "evil" parts for your postban AR but don't install them, that you can legally install them the day of the AW sunset and take a time-dated pic of it for legal proof.

This seems simple enough, but what if another AW ban is passed? Then is your formally post-ban AR now a "pre-ban" if you have a pic of it with evil features installed right after the sunset? Can you add evil features to it after this?

Also, I would like to buy a preban M4 upper in preparation for the ban. Since I would like to legally shoot it in the meantime, is there anything simple and CHEAP I can do to legally "disable" the flash suppressor so I can fire it on my postban and then modify it back? I know this is probably impossible since it still has the bayo lug - but what if this were filed off? I would like to have a bayo lug for show but honestly I would have zero use for it. Any suggestions?

(BTW, No I am not willing to illegally fire a preban upper on my postban lower)



Theoretically if you bought all of the preban goodies, assembled them on a post ban lower and took a dated picture of it, it would be illegal but once the ban did sunset it would then become an AW ban2 preban because it was in that configuration before the 2nd ban came into effect. RIGHT?
Link Posted: 5/11/2002 11:33:54 PM EDT
Basically I was told that all you had to do is buy the parts and have them assembled by a gunsmith and upon completion of the work he provides you with a sign and dated statement attesting (attaching photos to the statement helps alot too) he assembled the weapon in accordance with all federal/state laws . So upon he advice I've gotten some of the parts already . Now to wait for that glorious day ...
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 5:44:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dukota:

Originally Posted By DaveTX:
I understand that if you buy "evil" parts for your postban AR but don't install them, that you can legally install them the day of the AW sunset and take a time-dated pic of it for legal proof.

This seems simple enough, but what if another AW ban is passed? Then is your formally post-ban AR now a "pre-ban" if you have a pic of it with evil features installed right after the sunset? Can you add evil features to it after this?

Also, I would like to buy a preban M4 upper in preparation for the ban. Since I would like to legally shoot it in the meantime, is there anything simple and CHEAP I can do to legally "disable" the flash suppressor so I can fire it on my postban and then modify it back? I know this is probably impossible since it still has the bayo lug - but what if this were filed off? I would like to have a bayo lug for show but honestly I would have zero use for it. Any suggestions?

(BTW, No I am not willing to illegally fire a preban upper on my postban lower)



Theoretically if you bought all of the preban goodies, assembled them on a post ban lower and took a dated picture of it, it would be illegal but once the ban did sunset it would then become an AW ban2 preban because it was in that configuration before the 2nd ban came into effect. RIGHT?



I would agree with that presuming that the law is written to "grandfather" pre-AW ban #2, as is usually the case. At least that my opinion.
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 5:58:28 AM EDT
DaveTX-
To shoot your M4 upper (barrel is 16"s right?)don't modify that, just change the lower so that it will not accept detachable magazines. Fix it in place, and load it with the upper hinged open. Nothing permanent mind you, just not detachable without using some sort of tools and what not. Think SKS fixed magazine. You can replace the button for the mag release with a plastic nut (won't scratch).
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 6:01:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JAFO:

Even if this scenario were remotely realistic, dated photos probably wouldn't hold up in court. You program cameras to have a certain date. I would imagine photo processors could make the date say anything they wanted on prints. If you wanted something possibly legal to prove the date, perhaps you could run your photo to the notary public and have them stamp it. lol



Make 3 copies of photos & put in 3 sealed envelopes. Go to post office. Mail all 3 certified/return receipt requested. Send 1 copy to your attorney & tell him not to open. Send 2 to yourself...one goes in your safe deposit box & one someplace else. You don't open yours either. All will show the date you sent them, and all will have the po stamp over the seal. My lawyer says I'm covered. Comments??

-hanko
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 6:02:24 AM EDT
Just do your part to make sure the AWB disappears for good and then all this other stuff will not be a worry.
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 6:24:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MAC-DADDY:
so would the pic with the date on itbe a
proof of legit?



Nope. I can take a picture and set the date to 10/1/93. It won't serve as any evidence that my gun is a pre-ban. Even putting a newspaper with the date in the photo won't work. I can go to the Library and get old issues of newspapers to use.

You'll have to come up with something that is 'proof positive', such as the mailing idea mentioned above. Or even something like taking the gun to a Notary and have them notarize the photo and a letter.
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 6:24:21 AM EDT
First of all I have no disrespect intended, but U all are nuts if you think there going to let anything like what your talking happen. I agree with JAFO in they WILL make sure there is a new law on books before the old one expires. If you think different your really not thinking. For a politician it would be political suicide to do away with the ban,, AHHHH NO! some poor unfortunate drug dealer was shot with a gun with a flashhider he never even say the muzzle flash,, SEE I TOLD YOU NOT TO DO AWAY WITH THAT BAN YOU SUCK< TAKE ALL THE GUNS AWAY SO THE DRUG DEALERS CAN LIVE, YOU HAVE TO NOW TO FIX YOUR MISTAKE MISTER PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thats is the soccer mom additude of our great new country, the best country in the world we are free.. WEll we need to make ourselves free again, call your local politicians, join the NRA and other pro gun groups like JPOFO!!!!
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 6:58:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By coltshorty14:
First of all I have no disrespect intended, but U all are nuts if you think there going to let anything like what your talking happen. I agree with JAFO in they WILL make sure there is a new law on books before the old one expires. If you think different your really not thinking. For a politician it would be political suicide to do away with the ban,, AHHHH NO! some poor unfortunate drug dealer was shot with a gun with a flashhider he never even say the muzzle flash,, SEE I TOLD YOU NOT TO DO AWAY WITH THAT BAN YOU SUCK< TAKE ALL THE GUNS AWAY SO THE DRUG DEALERS CAN LIVE, YOU HAVE TO NOW TO FIX YOUR MISTAKE MISTER PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thats is the soccer mom additude of our great new country, the best country in the world we are free.. WEll we need to make ourselves free again, call your local politicians, join the NRA and other pro gun groups like JPOFO!!!!



You have to remember that the original law barely passed in the first place and the Democrats blamed their loss of the house and senate in 96 because of retribution from people voting for the AWB. Also the Democrats have been back tracking because a lot of them feel Gore lost because of his stance on gun control. If pro gun folks can make even more gains in this election cycle we have a great chance for the AWB to go away for good.
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 8:45:20 AM EDT
You could make a dated pic and have a notary public authenticate, date, etc. That should be legal. Once the ban sunsets I really think that its all fair game until the next ban and anything converted in the interim should be legal. It would be up to them to prove that anything prior to the next ban was illegal or not in place prior to the banII-in reality only the second ban laws would be in place.. Certainly CYA-ATF tends to make their own rules as times goes on. Hell some of their people seem to make up their own rules sometimes!
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 9:04:35 AM EDT
The answer to what to do if another AW ban is passed all depends on (1)when the ban is passed, and more importantly (2) what the ban says. Most of us are assuming the current ban will be renewed but there are other scenarios. The current AW ban may die a natural death, but a new ban could do any number of things to screw up the current system. Just a few examples - all AW's (pre and/or postban style) could be brought into a new category under the NFA and treated as class 3 weapons. All AW parts (barrels, bolts, fire control parts, etc.) could be regulated under some new scheme. The excise tax on new AW's could be raised from 11% to 100%, making it possible to buy new AW's but more costly. I think the most likely scenario is that the current ban will be renewed before it sunsets, but beyond that it simply depends on who authors the bill and what they try to write into it.
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 2:38:11 PM EDT
My solution is to go out and buy as many pre ban guns and parts as you can now, 'cause the sunset you're waiting for isn't going to happen.
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 4:46:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By xanadu:
My solution is to go out and buy as many pre ban guns and parts as you can now, 'cause the sunset you're waiting for isn't going to happen.

I agree!
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 8:50:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By crowboy:

Originally Posted By xanadu:
My solution is to go out and buy as many pre ban guns and parts as you can now, 'cause the sunset you're waiting for isn't going to happen.

I agree!



Round and round we go. The 1994 AW ban WILL sunset. There is NO provision for extension. THe only question is will a new law be in place before Sept 04' to take it's place?
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 9:33:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dukota:

Originally Posted By crowboy:

Originally Posted By xanadu:
My solution is to go out and buy as many pre ban guns and parts as you can now, 'cause the sunset you're waiting for isn't going to happen.

I agree!



Round and round we go. The 1994 AW ban WILL sunset. There is NO provision for extension. THe only question is will a new law be in place before Sept 04' to take it's place?



Dukota is correct..the AW ban WILL sunset. It is written into it to do so. However, they can pass a NEW law before or after it will sunset.

medcop
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 5:50:40 AM EDT
EVERYONE............!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

read Hankos note !!!!!

he is 100% correct one this one, get the law & lawyers on yer side from the git go...., why do you thynk that post marked sealed evidence has more weight in court than a "National Enquirer" article !!!!!!!!

take those photos & do what he says !!!!!!!!!!!!
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 7:58:36 AM EDT
Just to be doubly sure, take the photos, have them notarized and send them to your lawyer. You can never be too sure. May as well try and close as many holes as possible.
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 8:03:16 AM EDT
Also, if you want the M4 option now, you might get the 16" barrel post ban upper. When the sunset rolls around, take it to a gunsmith and have him cut it down to 14.5", thread the barrel, and permanently attach a flash suppressor. As for the bayonet lug, you can buy a new front sight with the lug and have the gunsmith install that too.

Link Posted: 5/13/2002 8:16:35 AM EDT
All of your dated, notarized, postmarked photos will do you as much good as a screen door on a submarine. If you do end up in court, the BATF and the prosecutors will play the games in the system they own and your nice photos will not even be admitted into evidence, they will be excluded from trial. This just seems to be how these slimeballs work. I wouldn' trust my safety to a damn photo when going against the BATF. You're pretty much just screwed at that point.

As far as the ban, tell me why they need a new ban? Sure this one is set to sunset - as far as I know they don't need to replace it, all they have to do is Amend it via small, simple, comparatively quiet new bill (or a simple provision in another, unrelated bill) to remove the sunset date. In this case it would actually be better for us if they go for a newer bigger badder bill because it would be a much harder fight than simply amending a bill to extend it.

This thing ain't going away folks. It's way to easy for them to at least keep what they have. I'm also not so certain they couldn't pass a bigger badder bill, although it may be harder now than in '94.

Mike
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 8:17:18 AM EDT
Most of you are already defeated. You automatically assume the worst and give up. With this kind of mentality, your fears will come true.

Lets look at the facts.
1. The ban will Sunset, there are no ifs, it will.

2. Gun control is not very popular now, and is declining in popularity.

3. The AW ban passed with a few votes, and the Democrats lost big time because of the AW ban.

4. The AW ban has done nothing to prevent crime; this will be brought up and paraded around if there is a 2nd ban proposed.

If the politicians are so worried about these guns, why are they not passing new laws now? Many of you seem to think that it will happen automatically. It will not. The pro-gun group is much more organized now than it was before. Any bill that is proposed is known within a day or 2 of its introduction. This gives us time to defeat it before it is too late. The Internet is a very powerful tool, and we must use it, along with our other tools to make our voices heard.

You people must stop thinking we have already lost the battle, because thinking like this will cause it to happen.
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 8:33:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By macloud:
Most of you are already defeated. You automatically assume the worst and give up. With this kind of mentality, your fears will come true.

Lets look at the facts.
1. The ban will Sunset, there are no ifs, it will.

2. Gun control is not very popular now, and is declining in popularity.

3. The AW ban passed with a few votes, and the Democrats lost big time because of the AW ban.

4. The AW ban has done nothing to prevent crime; this will be brought up and paraded around if there is a 2nd ban proposed.

If the politicians are so worried about these guns, why are they not passing new laws now? Many of you seem to think that it will happen automatically. It will not. The pro-gun group is much more organized now than it was before. Any bill that is proposed is known within a day or 2 of its introduction. This gives us time to defeat it before it is too late. The Internet is a very powerful tool, and we must use it, along with our other tools to make our voices heard.

You people must stop thinking we have already lost the battle, because thinking like this will cause it to happen.



I love a positive attitude!!
Link Posted: 5/14/2002 12:55:13 AM EDT
A few votes ??? It only passed by 1 vote in an overwhelmingly democrat controlled house. For legitimate purposes it was defeated. The slimeball Democrat Speaker kept the voting open for an extra 15 +/- minutes after the bill was defeated by 1 vote allowing a single congresscritter to change their vote "in light of new information", thereby passing the bill.

In 1996, a repeal of the 1994 AW Ban was passed by a landslide in the House of Representatives only to meet its fate either in the Senate or President's Desk. I'm not sure if any of the repeals made it to the President's desk or not.

The 1996 House is essentially what we have right now +/- a few pro/antis. If we can mantain control of the house even by a single member, any new bill will be DOA. Tom DeLay (R-TX)(GOA Rated A- or Pro-Gun Voter) decides what gets voted on. Anybody wonder why none of the recent Anti-Gun legislation has made it to the House Floor ??? As long as the Republicans control the House (even by 1 member), DeLay will be able to kill any bill on arrival. But, if the Democrats regain control (GOD FORBID) their guys will decide what gets voted on and a new bill will make it to the floor where it probably won't pass, but could.

As far as the Senate goes, I hate to say it but they will eagerly pass any new bill. Especially with the addition of Elizabeth "Who Needs an AK-47" Dole.

Bush can do 1 of 4 things to the bill, sign it making it into law, veto it affirming our rights, take no action whil Congress is in session it allowing it to pass w/o a signature, or taking no action while Congress is not in session effectively vetoeing it w/o having to use his veto stamp.

I don't really know what Bush will do. Assuming there isn't a big shooting before the elections, he will probably veto it as he did so many times to the CFR Bill. But, if there is a shooting he might sign it as he did CFR following ENRON.

I don't expect any legislation to make it out of the House. But, if it does you better start stocking up.
Link Posted: 5/14/2002 5:54:34 AM EDT
cc - Great post, very informative. Let's hope against hope for the next congressional election... (remember that historically, the party with presidential power loses control of congress). I am optimistic too though.
Link Posted: 5/14/2002 10:00:38 PM EDT
I keep reading how pro-gun the your government has become and hear no mention of the bans your government HAS made on guns. They have made it virtually IMPOSSIBLE for any company in the USA to export 50.cals, short barreled shotguns, and short barreled rifles. Not only that, but now suddenly people have to fill and sign tons of paperwork just for any AR/AK/evil looking rifle. We also have to do the same to buy simple things like AR trigger, or an AK front sight.

I have had friends from the USA complain to me how stupid Canadian laws are about exporting firearms parts, and I remind them they are filling those form 6's to the BATF, not the RCMP.

And of course all this might not mean anything to you guys, but all those firearm companies you buy from now are almost cut off from international markets.

Enjoy your gun prices.
Link Posted: 5/15/2002 8:35:51 PM EDT
You know, I don't really like to flame people but I just cant stand hearing all this talk about a new ban being set in place. I read JAFO's post stating that there will be stricter bans put in BEFORE the old one sets. Frankly, I cant stand this kind of loser talk. I mean gimme a break, no one has even proposed a new ban and some members on this forum have already accepted defeat! Pleeease!

We are currently at a time where gun-control is highly unpopular, some have gone so far as declaring it dead. We have, in the last couple of years done the following:

>Exposed the extreme liberal bias against guns; which helped to expose them for liars. AND helped tone down their attack. Now they usually show both viewpoints and have learned to tone down their lies.
>Introduced and passed many new CCW laws.
>Helped a liberal vice-president go on unemployment (Gore). Who by the way blamed the NRA for his defeat(A good thing).
>Helped elect a president who supports the 2nd amendment.
>Managed to bring the 2nd amendment back to the conscience of the people.
>Had a couple of court decisions enforcing the individuals' 2nd amendment stance.
>Managed to have every gun manufacturer law-suit thrown out of court; other than a few liberal judges which against all evidence didn't do so....but in the end be thrown out.

After all this, I cannot belive there are members that think a new ban will come in! A ban that as we already covered, barely passed by ONE VOTE, while being pushed through at EXTREME pressure by Klinton.

I've already begun buying pre-ban parts to put together in a couple of years.

I do realize we have to keep the pressure up but talking like a loser is no way of doing this.


Link Posted: 5/15/2002 9:49:03 PM EDT
Well put mayday!!
Link Posted: 5/15/2002 10:05:09 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Mayday:

I've already begun buying pre-ban parts to put together in a couple of years.


Just today I picked up a Colt 1/9 twist pre-ban upper, 20" for $280. I'm getting ready as well.
Link Posted: 5/16/2002 9:40:57 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/16/2002 9:46:38 AM EDT by warlord]
U.S. politics is so fluid it is hard to predict what is going to happen in 2004. So far Geo. Bush Jr. has gone record that the right to bear arms is an individual right but with certain undefined exceptions and/or restrictions; and has been reported that GWB Jr. supports the AW ban(but like all good news reporters, if there is no news, invent some). I guess whether the AW ban sunsets or not is a roll of the dice at this moment in time today. If there was another national disaster, things could change right away. It is really hard to tell because we are just ordinary people on the street. But one thing for sure, the WTC/Pentagon attack sure changed a lot of people's mind about guns, at least in the short-term, and as we get closer to the expiration date be prepared for the anti-gunners and their minions to start propagandizing us with snipets and sound bits disguised as news to keep the ban. I'm sure that the antis are preparing for it now by producing and stockpiling various short stories news clips/stories. Notice some of these sound bits/stories don't have dates? they have been produced months ahead of time.
Link Posted: 5/16/2002 10:38:03 PM EDT
We need to be realistic about this law here. The fact of the matter is that Bush has publicly stated many times that he "supports" the AW ban. So has Ashcroft, although it can be argued that he is merely enforcing the laws on the books. We can't count on a veto - he'll sign it. However, he can't sign a bill he doesn't receive. We need to work on the 2004 elections as our top priority.

Finally, it doesn't matter how many Democrats or Republicans control whatver side of Congress, it only matters how many people pledge not to sign a new AW bill. Too many "pro-gun" Senators and Reps supported the AW ban in the first place.
Link Posted: 5/17/2002 2:11:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Kroagnon:
We need to be realistic about this law here. The fact of the matter is that Bush has publicly stated many times that he "supports" the AW ban. So has Ashcroft, although it can be argued that he is merely enforcing the laws on the books. We can't count on a veto - he'll sign it. However, he can't sign a bill he doesn't receive. We need to work on the 2004 elections as our top priority.

Finally, it doesn't matter how many Democrats or Republicans control whatver side of Congress, it only matters how many people pledge not to sign a new AW bill. Too many "pro-gun" Senators and Reps supported the AW ban in the first place.



You don't have a very firm understanding of how our government works.

We need to work on THIS YEAR'S elections as our top priority. That will determine the makeup of Congress when the current AW ban sunsets on 9/14/04. We need the Republicans to maintain control of the House. Regaining control of the Senate would pretty much lock things up in our favor.

It DOES matter who controls the House and Senate. The party who controls them gets to decide who chairs and controls the various committees. This in effect controls what legislation will ever make it to the floor for a vote.

So tell us, how much gun control legislation has made it a vote since the Republicans gained cotrol of both the Senate and the House back in 1996? That's right people. Zero. Even though certain anti-gun Democrats keep introducing bills in committee, they never go anywhere and die quiet deaths.
Link Posted: 5/17/2002 4:51:38 AM EDT
it seems there are a few people here who "trust" politicians.........!! is it because you are naive ?? or lack of experience ??

i do NOT have a defeatist attitude, i just have a far better understanding of politicians than do some, & if any one on this forum thynks for one second that azzwypes lyke Chuckie, Hilly & Gepphart are going to stand still & be quiet & allow the ban to sunset......., then allow me to present you wyth an offer to buy a very big canyon in the northern part of my beautiful state !!!!!!!!
Link Posted: 5/17/2002 5:56:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2002 5:59:53 AM EDT by JAFO]

Originally Posted By mayday:
You know, I don't really like to flame people but I just cant stand hearing all this talk about a new ban being set in place. I read JAFO's post stating that there will be stricter bans put in BEFORE the old one sets. Frankly, I cant stand this kind of loser talk. I mean gimme a break, no one has even proposed a new ban and some members on this forum have already accepted defeat! Pleeease!

We are currently at a time where gun-control is highly unpopular, some have gone so far as declaring it dead. We have, in the last couple of years done the following:

>Exposed the extreme liberal bias against guns; which helped to expose them for liars. AND helped tone down their attack. Now they usually show both viewpoints and have learned to tone down their lies.
>Introduced and passed many new CCW laws.
>Helped a liberal vice-president go on unemployment (Gore). Who by the way blamed the NRA for his defeat(A good thing).
>Helped elect a president who supports the 2nd amendment.
>Managed to bring the 2nd amendment back to the conscience of the people.
>Had a couple of court decisions enforcing the individuals' 2nd amendment stance.
>Managed to have every gun manufacturer law-suit thrown out of court; other than a few liberal judges which against all evidence didn't do so....but in the end be thrown out.

After all this, I cannot belive there are members that think a new ban will come in! A ban that as we already covered, barely passed by ONE VOTE, while being pushed through at EXTREME pressure by Klinton.

I've already begun buying pre-ban parts to put together in a couple of years.

I do realize we have to keep the pressure up but talking like a loser is no way of doing this.





Next time you decide to flame me, why don't you make sure you read everything I wrote, instead of just saying you read it. I am referring to this:


From a quote by JAFO: You can scorn me, or you can realize that this CAN happen, and get ready to start writing to your elected representatives :)



Now, if you think I'm a loser, that's your own opinion. If you think you can coast right on through Sept. 2004, then I'm afraid that YOU are the loser. It's better to believe the worst CAN happen, and try to prevent it, than to think you've already won, and complain if things don't turn out how you thought they would.

I'm a registered voter, an NRA member, and a firm believer in our right to Keep and Bear Arms.

The true defeatists aren't the ones who know what can happen in 2004. They are the ones who think they can ignore it because we've "come so far." I assure you the fight is no where near over.

Of course you haven't seen new bans proposed yet. Do you really think the anti's are going to start pushing for new legislation now? ...before elections? ...a whole year before the ban is supposed to end, so that their supporters can burn out?

You do what you want. I'll do what I feel I have to do. I will be writing to my representatives in various government positions letting them know what my feelings are.

Edited because this loser makes grammatical errors ;)
Link Posted: 5/17/2002 9:26:26 AM EDT
I have been reading everyone's post of what is going happen when/if the '94 AW law expires. It is futile effort to try to 2nd guess what the politicians are going to do. I think the BATF bureaucrats are going to do what they always do best, they are going make up the rules as they go along. I'm pretty sure it will to the detriment of the shooting community. It appears that many of the BATF rules are arbitrary and capricose, and they make rules up just to suit the situation at the moment.
Link Posted: 5/17/2002 2:13:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Boomer:
Originally Posted By Kroagnon:
We need to be realistic about this law here. The fact of the matter is that Bush has publicly stated many times that he "supports" the AW ban. So has Ashcroft, although it can be argued that he is merely enforcing the laws on the books. We can't count on a veto - he'll sign it. However, he can't sign a bill he doesn't receive. We need to work on the 2004 elections as our top priority.

Finally, it doesn't matter how many Democrats or Republicans control whatver side of Congress, it only matters how many people pledge not to sign a new AW bill. Too many "pro-gun" Senators and Reps supported the AW ban in the first place.
You don't have a very firm understanding of how our government works.
(rest of babbling deleted)


Whoops - I meant to say 2002 congressional elections of course.

And yes I'm well aware of how my government works, Boomer, probably more than you judging by your overconfident arrogance. I also know that I'll be damned if I'm going to vote for an anti-gun Republican.
Link Posted: 5/17/2002 2:38:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Kroagnon:
And yes I'm well aware of how my government works, Boomer, probably more than you judging by your overconfident arrogance.



Perhaps next time you could back that statement up by demonstrating it.
Link Posted: 5/17/2002 2:44:07 PM EDT
Some of you guys might also consider using a little more discretion. I don't think I would be advertising only having a post-ban AR and stocking up on pre-ban parts. Theoretically, the BATF could bust you for intent to assemble an illegal assault weapon for simply having in your possession all the parts necessary to do so. Much like they can and do for having the parts necessary to assemble an illegal machine gun.

Me? Once the ban sunsets, who knows, I might consider swapping some of the spare parts I keep on hand for my pre-ban ARs onto my post-ban.
Link Posted: 5/17/2002 2:48:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2002 2:49:44 PM EDT by DaveTX]

Originally Posted By Boomer:
Some of you guys might also consider using a little more discretion. I don't think I would be advertising only having a post-ban AR and stocking up on pre-ban parts. Theoretically, the BATF could bust you for intent to assemble an illegal assault weapon for simply having in your possession all the parts necessary to do so. Much like they can and do for having the parts necessary to assemble an illegal machine gun.



Ehhhh that is a good point, but I seriously doubt or at least hope they wouldn't do this especially considering that we state in this forum that we are waiting for the ban to sunset! It's not illegal to possess these parts, so how could they possibly prove intent???? Innocent till proven guilty...

Me? I don't own any preban parts. I probably will buy a telescoping stock and a phantom soon before the sunset. Maybe a front sight post with bayo lug too... would never use it though, just for show lol.
Link Posted: 5/17/2002 4:29:03 PM EDT
There is one way to put your fears of being prosecuted with "intent to build an assault weapon" to rest... buy one of those FAB-10 receivers. This became the obvious solution to me since I live in good old California.

Your FAB-10 receiver does not have a detachable magazine and is therefore not regulated by ANY assault weapon ban, federal included. This means that you can go out and buy as many preban uppers as you want (but they still have to have barrels longer than 16") because they are all for your FAB-10 receiver, not your post ban AR receiver.

As far as my philosphy goes for Sept. 2004, I say hope for the best but expect the worst.
Link Posted: 5/17/2002 5:17:25 PM EDT

You have to remember that the original law barely passed in the first place and the Democrats blamed their loss of the house and senate in 96 because of retribution from people voting for the AWB. Also the Democrats have been back tracking because a lot of them feel Gore lost because of his stance on gun control. If pro gun folks can make even more gains in this election cycle we have a great chance for the AWB to go away for good.

I'll second that, we are much stronger than before and getting stronger everyday. It's just like cornering a wild animal, when he has no other option he will fight back.
Link Posted: 5/18/2002 9:32:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/18/2002 9:38:01 PM EDT by cc48510]
There is nothing in the law or the Constitution that would suggest that possessing all the parts for anything other than say a handgun or machinegun would constitute such. Enough parts to build a MG is considered a MG. It is part of the definition. Therefore, if you have everything you need to convert to a MG, you do not have intent, you have a MG.

Same with handguns, all the parts to assemble a handgun is a Handgun according to subparagraph 2 of the definition of a Handgun. But, there is no such wording in the AW Ban or for that matter any other gun laws, except for a few NFA-Type Weapons.

But, even though the ATF has no authority to question intent, the ATF has artifically assumed such powers. Until the 90's these powers were illegal. That was when SCOTUS made a ruling on so called "intent". The ruling was a mixed blessing/loss. Basically, they ruled that if the parts had NO legal use in any gun you possessed, then they constituted an illegal weapon. SCOTUS ruled that the Congress "obviously intended" to make such illegal. This is total BS w/o any grounds in the Constitution or law. But, alas when SCOTUS rules, it becomes law for all intents and purposes. IMHO, if Congress intended to ban possession of all the parts, they would ahve written it into the law as they did with MGs and Silencers in 1934 and again in 1968.

Basically, this means that if there is ANY legal way to assemble those parts, then you cannot be charged/convicted. But, the ATF has made a grand total of ZERO arrests for so called "intent" to build an AW. Or for that matter, I haven't heard of a single arrest for "intent" to build anything other than a MG or Silencer. Though, there may be a few add-on charges I haven't heard about. Also, since the law expires in a couple years, you can say that they have a legal use...assembling a gun 2 years from now.
Top Top