DeLay: "Zero chance" for (Assault Weapons Ban) renewal passing in House

AWBanSunset.com ^ | 5/9/03 | Stuart Roy

[E. Pluribus Unum]

House Majority leader Tom DeLay, through a spokesman, says the recently introduced AW Ban renewal bills (the Senate version, or the significantly more restrictive House version) will not pass in the House of Representatives.

[Amerigomag]

To all the hysterical "Bush betrayed us" Nervous Nellies out there (and you know who you are

You're looking one right in the eye and I'm sick and tired of our compassionate conservative friend hiding behind someone else's skirt to politically pander.

This crap about rope-a-dope et is a poor excuse/spin of a political character.

Don't know what this fellow is but he comes a lot closer to my definition of a slick politician than a principaled conservative. Don't remember Regan hiding behind the skirt of the house whip.

[Sender]

Does this mean that new guns will be sold with high cap mags now?

I don't know, but I'll bet an odd new class of collectible weapons may result: the "inter-ban" rifle strangely lacking a normal bayonet lug and flash hider, sporting something called a "thumbhole" stock, and marked with sinister names like "HBAR", "Sporter" or "SAR". These will go for premium prices when our grandchildren collect at future gun shows ;)

[merak]

SPLENDID!!!! That's what you call teamwork! Bush and the Republican party win Ca. and NY next time, and we all get to keep our assault rifles!!!!!

[Sender]

OK, I'll spot you an AR-15, a flat piece of steel, a drill press and a file and I'll check back with you in 24 hours if it's so easy. Seriously, one of the anti-gunners' most damaging myths is that all semi-autos are really machine guns with one part missing. We shouldn't reinforce that myth; in reality it ain't that easy, and it certainly ain't legal.

[supercat]

It's so easy to take an AR-15 and make it fully auto (it just takes a flat piece of steel with a few holes).

Depends whether you want something that will actually work without blowing up.

I have yet to hear any explanation of why it's easier to turn an AR-15 into a useful machine gun than e.g. a Ruger Mini-14.

[elbucko]

We shouldn't reinforce that myth; in reality it ain't that easy, and it certainly ain't legal.

I completely agree with you. I was/am a machinist and have done some "smithing" in my past. For the ignorant to insinuate that the conversion is easy does no one any favor except VPC.

[FairOpinion]

"To all the hysterical "Bush betrayed us" Nervous Nellies out there (and you know who you are): Delay will do his job. "

----

Exactly!

[glockmeister40]

Think of the attack at El Al counter in LA...now have a dozen guys there instead of one...and arm them with machine guns.

There's nothing in this bogus gun bill about maching guns. There never was. Machine guns are highly regulated. There's nothing in this bill about guns becoming easier to get. As far as terrorists go, I want the ability to shoot back with a high-capacity magazine.

Please get your facts straight.

[glockmeister40]

If a few more citizens were carrying concealed, this lunatic piece of crap would have taken two in the chest and one in the head before he caused so much trouble.

[Sonny M]

Keep in mind, that in Israel, they actually ask there citizens to carry guns. Anyway, if these people are going to go on a shooting rampage, they could either smuggle there guns in, or simply make explosives. This law, in all honesty, affects terrorists about as much as banning card board boxes do.

[1stFreedom]

>>OK, I'll spot you an AR-15, a flat piece of steel, a drill press and a file and I'll check back with you in 24 hours if it's so easy. Seriously, one of the anti-gunners' most damaging myths is that all semi-autos are really machine guns with one part missing. We shouldn't reinforce that myth; in reality it ain't that easy, and it certainly ain't legal.

Well, it's not a case of simply filing metal down. It's not *that* easy. Some power tools would be required to cut the metal and drill holes. (Machine shop tools would be the quickest).

With decent home power tools and a piece of metal roughly the correct thinckness the part could be made in a few hours. If you have a metal shop, I'd say it would take 1/2 hour.

Now, this only works for an AR-15. (Plans are on the internet if you are curious.)

But for most gun enthusiasts, automatic fire is a waste in ways. It's cool to fire once in a while, but over all it just eats away at ammo, and the price of ammo does add up even when purchased in bulk.

Then there is the problem with getting caught with an fully auto weapon.

Finally, most people are concerned with their grouping rather than shooting the hell out of a target.

I myself prefer black powder, very low tech.

[FairOpinion]

"Preserving the assault weapons ban makes it just that much harder for terrorists to obtain tools of the trade. "

----

Sure, all terrorists get their assault weapons legally in US gun stores, sure. (/sarcasm)

Terrorists by them in the Middle East for$10, then smuggle the weapons and theselves in through Mexico. An assault rifle in the hands of terrorists is the last thing we need to worry about.

On the other hand, an assault rifle in the hands of law abiding citizens may prevent a terrorist from setting off a nuke, releasing bioterror weapons, or setting off a conventional bomb.

[1stFreedom]

Can't say if it's easier or harder. I've only seen the template for an AR-15 conversion.

[FairOpinion]

"If Bush knew that it was not going to ever cross his desk, then why say anything at all about his willingness to sign it? "

----

POLITICS. It would have been political suicide for him to say anything else. As I said in another post on this topic, can you imagine the Dem attack ads against Bush, calling him a baby killer and the graphic ads they would show, claiming that Bush is thwarting the will of the people, if Bush had said that he will veto it, if it passes Congress?

It is the responsibility of Congress to stop it, as they are doing.

[FairOpinion]

"You're looking one right in the eye and I'm sick and tired of our compassionate conservative friend hiding behind someone else's skirt to politically pander."

---

I think you have it backwards. It's the responsibility of Congress to stop this, as they will. If Congress would pass it, expecting Bush to veto it, THAT would mean that Congress is not doing their jobs, and are trying to hide behind the President, putting him in a position of political suicide.

Then you can stay home and not vote, and watch Hillary, or Kerry or some other RAT get elected, and a Dem president would definitely sign it.

So what would be accoplished is for conservative Republicans being "useful idiots" for the Democrats.

Didn't conservatives learn anything from the election of Clinton, when they were made at Bush41 because of him going back on his "no new taxes" promise, and either didn't vote or voted for Ross Perot, and by their actions, THEY elected Clinton.

As in a chess game, you need to look NOT just at the next move, but several moves ahead, at the consequences of your actions.

PS. This is not meant personally against you, this is some general "food for thought" that I wish all "purist" conservatives would think about, that sometimes, they are liberall "cutting off their nose, to spite their face".

[Godebert]

If you want to vote for a gun-grabber.....that's your business. Don't tell me how to cast my vote.

[LibKill]

Make it so.

[section9]

Preserving the assault weapons ban makes it just that much harder for terrorists to obtain tools of the trade.

With an enormous amount of due respect to a fellow Mac user, bollocks.

The AWB would not stop dedicated, trained Al Qaeda operatives from smuggling weapons into the United States and using them. The only thing that has stopped additional Al Qaeda operations here is the strategy of forward attack, holding the enemy by the belt to kill him first.

The AWB had nothing to do with it.

Indeed, I would argue that armed citizens are a nation's best defense!

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[husky ed]

Delay will do his job.

To bad Bush didn't do his and say he "wouldn't" sign any unconstitutional laws and would have those already on the books thrown out.

He's the one that took the oath of office of President, not Delay.

[Godebert]

Feinstein and Schumer Welcome Bush's Support of Assault Weapons Ban

Looks like you're in good company, eh?