the 1994 AW ban will sunset on sept 13 2004, there is no question about that, as I understand it at that point it will be like the law never existed, the ban cannot be renewed, but a new one can be created, so even if a new law is passed (god forbid), wont all of out postban guns (1994-2004) be grandfathered, wont we be able to put on, and keep "evil featurs" on our postbans?????  Because if a new ban is enacted, it wont start until after sept 13 2004, and as I understand it, when the ban sunsets it will be as it never existed, gone..., so isnt this feasible that we will be able to keep more than 2 evil features on our postbans after 2004, no matter what??????,   jason

The congress could vote to extend the bill for anther ten years, or they could just vote to make a permanent ban.

Lets just stick to your theory. Even if the ban were to sunset on day X and a new one were to go into affect on day Z, and you had day Y as a way to get yourself a pre-ban, you would have to have your legal X dated post ban converted with the evil features before the new ban went into affect. To do that you would have to have all the evil parts sitting around for day Y to come. This in itself can be considered a violation of the law before it expires.

Just keep it simple, do your part to help make sure that the old one sunsets without any new ones going into affect.

I have a question. Lets say that the ban sunsets and congress decides to enact another one. Well lets say enough people get rallied up in a state and contact enough of their state officials and get somthing going. Could A state not defy federal law but make the ban "useless in thier state. Inotherwords alot of states have tougher standards now that are different than the "standard" set by the federal government. So could a state in fact ALSO have lighter restrictions than the standard set by federal law. Inotherwords If another AW ban went into effect could a state either lawfully not make that law a part of thier state laws or else more practicly "avoid" that law by making thier own standards for what an "assualt weapon" is like so many states do now. is this fesable?

Yes it's feasible BUT i'm sure the Fed government will think of some evil and nasty way to deny the state much need funding, as an unofficial penalty of course.