Gun bills may trigger split

THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | Feb 23, 2004 | Brian DeBose

[ought-six]

I'm in Illinois. Bush has zero chance of carrying Illinois in November. So, if I decide to cast a "protest" vote for, say, a third-party candidate, or simply protest by leaving the presidential column blank, it won't make a bit of difference to Illinois' electoral college votes: The Dim will carry Illinois no matter whom I vote for for president.

[ought-six]

"It's easy to say 'we get what we deserve' but I'd like to think there are several million freedom lovers who want to live in the Constitutional Republic we supposedly do."

Like me.

[ought-six]

"Bottom line: If he signs it, he'll lose the election. If not, he still might lose."

That's a fact.

[aomagrat]

If Bush signs the AWB ban, I'll probably vote for Nader.

[Owen]

1) This bill is not about assault weapons. It is about immunizing the gun industry from lawsuits.

2) The AWB won't be part of this bill if amendments are not offered. They are offered by Democrats and RINOs. In the Senate this is allowed.

3) The House won't approve it in that form. The House will offer up a bill without any AWB amendments.

4) The Senate will consider that bill. It may pass. If it does, Bush will sign it and it will immunize the gun industry and have no ABW aspect to it at all.

5) Bush will not sign any bill ABW relevant because none will ever appear on his desk.

6) Much ado about nothing.

[OXENinFLA]

Remove Feinstein rider from firearms liability bill (Assault Weapons Ban)

[Monty22]

I wish I had your optimism.

[af_vet_rr]

The AWB was the last holdout issue for me. I was still hanging in there with Bush. But this bill was and is my litmus test.

I can live with campaign finance reform, open borders, OPIC, the deficits and the underwriting of foreign companies. I can even live with the offshoring of every job in America worth having to fatten to coffers of Dubya's corporate handlers.

Your a more forgiving person than I am. If he signs this, and because of the timing I can't honestly say which way he would go, I think he will be in for a surprise when the votes are counted. He would need a lot more than Nader running again to help him out.

[justshutupandtakeit]

All guns are not banned in Chicago. Handguns are. However, strange as it may seem when a citizen has to use one of these banned instruments of the Devil in self-defense s/he is not prosecuted. Juries are not going to convict so they just grab the gun and move on.

[neverdem]

I say no compromise.

I won't be surprised if there's another 10 year renewal because RINOs are spineless.

Anything beyond that, forget about it. I've admitted that I'm ready to vote for GWB regardless. I can understand the disgust of everyone else.

[neverdem]

All he has to say is that was his position BEFORE 9-11-2001, but now things have changed.

Excellent! Tell the White House!

[Dave Olson]

The idea that some people consider Bush to be a good conservative is just stupid, too.

Uh-huh. And I presume you are one of these purists who'd help install a leftist regime as your way of punishing him. Never mind the hellhole that would create for people, including yourself.

[neverdem]

The Dim will carry Illinois no matter whom I vote for for president.

Keep hope alive. Never say never other than my name on this forum and other situations. If you lived in New York like me, then your pessimism would be justified, but I still vote.

[neverdem]

"Does anyone know when the vote on this bill is??"

Within the next day or two maybe, according to the Slimes.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1084162/posts

[neverdem]

All he has to say is that was his position BEFORE 9-11-2001, but now things have changed.

And now with all the mobilizations of Guard and Reserve units as well as so many police departments complaining that they don't have enough personnel because of call-ups to active duty, its the perfect time to explain the need for the unorganized militia.

[El Gato]

The House will offer up a bill without any AWB amendments.

They already have, about 10 months ago.

[El Gato]

It's possible for the Senate to amend a House passed bill. If they do and also pass the bill, it goes to conferance commitee and the results of that must be voted on by both houses. The most likely outcome, IMHO and Neal Knox's, is no industry protection bill and no AWB renewal. At least the latter won't be enacted with the lawsuit bill, but you can bet there are plenty of other bills that the gun grabbers can attach it to.

[Squantos]

Agree.........BTTT !

[DMZFrank]

The AWB is directly about the RKBA.

Gun grabbers are increasingly trying to separate the right to keep and bear arms from its constitutional underpinnings. To everyone but many liberals and gun grabbers the word militia implies a body organized for military use. The Supreme Court Miller decision of 1939 held that the militia was 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."

To begin with, only the national government was represented at the trial. With nobody arguing to the contrary, the court followed standard court procedure and assumed that the law was constitutional until proven otherwise. If both sides were present, the outcome may have been much different.

However, since only one party showed up, the case will stand in the court records as is. As to the militia, Mr. Justice McReynolds related the beliefs of the Founding Fathers when commenting historically about the Second Amendment. He stated that, ". . .The common view was that adequate defense of country and laws could be secured through the militia- civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion.

"The significance attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense.

It is clear that the firearms that are most suited for modern-day militia use are those semi automatic military pattern weapons that the yellow press calls "assault weapons". Since nations such as the Swiss trust their citizenry with true selective fire assault rifles, it seems to me that this country ought to be at least able to trust its law-abiding citizenry with the semi automatic version.

Self-defense is a vital corollary benefit of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. But its primary constitutional reason for being is for service in the well-regulated militia which is necessary to the security of a free state. Don't let the gun grabbers and their politician allies separate us from the constitutional reason for the right to keep and bear arms.

PostScript: In the vernacular of the founders well-regulated meant well drilled and organized.

[ought-six]

I still vote, as well. As for the diference between New York and, say, Chicago, I will remind you that Chicago bans the personal ownership of handguns, and long guns must be registered, etc. And Chicago is the murder capitol of the nation. Just goes to show how effective "gun control" is in reducing crime. The gun-grabbers, like King Richard II of Chicago, care not a whit about reducing crime. What they DO care about is having unfettered power. That is why the gun-grabbers want to disarm the American people: They know that when government fears the people, there is freedom; but when the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The gun-grabbers are tyrants, through and through, and in order for them to maintain control they have to disarm the people and make the people fear them. It is that simple.