Bush Backs Renewing Assault Weapons Ban

Washington Post ^ | April 12, 2003 | Unknown

[Mini-14]

The Bush administration is bucking the National Rifle Association and supporting a renewal of the assault weapons ban, set to expire just before the presidential election. "The president supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law," White House spokesman Scott McClellan told Knight Ridder.

Tossing out the ban on semiautomatic weapons is a top priority of the NRA. Bush said during his presidential campaign that he supported the ban, but it was less clear whether he would support an extension.

[rintense]

Thank you for giving an answer I can understand and appreciate.

[Mini-14]

Rintense, you stated that I can understand a handgun, a pistol, a rifle, etc.

Please show why you need a "handgun, a pistol, or a rifle?"

And by the way, a pistol is a kind of handgun, but not all handguns are pistols.

[rintense]

Got it. Thank you for the reply!

[B Knotts]

Are you saying that you support renewal of the "assault weapons" ban?

Also, you seem to think that this will only affect the votes of those focused on this particular issue. But, this sort of thing sends a broader message to his core conservatives; namely: get lost.

If Congress renews this abomination, and he signs it into law, mark my words: he will lose, because conservatives will stay home. Also, the GOP will likely lose control of the Senate.

Mushy moderates will split their vote, because they dislike single-party control of government.

[Henrietta]

"Perhaps you can educate us on the difference between the Bill of Rights and the Bill of Needs."

Good one!

[Mr. Mojo]

My pleasure, rintense.

[rintense]

I asked an honest question. And I got some good replies. I'm simply trying to understand the issue and learn something. IOW,

[Mulder]

Bush has been very good to gun owners and second amendment watchdogs

I agree.

He's slashed funding for the BATF, reassigned prosecutors whos sole job was prosecuting 'gun crimes', busted through the bureacracy so that pilots could be armed after 9/11, and stated the 2nd amendment was an individial Right not subject to restriction by the federal gov't.

Can you imagine if Gore had won the election? He'd have done the exact opposite.

[B Knotts]

Please define "assault weapon."

[IGOTMINE]

"First of all, the "assault weapons ban" doesn't actually DO anything. It was a cosmetics bill that has already been sidestepped by all gun manufacturers. Remember, it's only a piece of paper. Why should Bush spend political capital on something that he cannot win the PR war on and which will accomplish NOTHING? Also, who knows if it will ever even get to his desk to sign?"

Your post betrays a charming ignorance. The AWB did a lot...it drove the cost of high capacity magazines through the roof. It drove the prices of "black rifles" through the roof". Most importantly, it gave the gun ban bastards a nose under the camels tent.

If this story pans out true, if the White House gets involved in renewing this odious legislation, it'll finally happen. I'll finally vote Libertarian. I won't be alone. W lost the popular vote in 2000, and Thank God, squeaked out an electoral college win. (Madison was a genius.) If he embarks upon this course of action and cross the NRA, he' ll be a one termer like Poppy.

Before you excoriate me on this, let me ask a question. Do you have a line in the sand? A place where politicans dare not tread? IF you don't, I think you need to seriously reassess you postions, and be sure to ask for a window seat on the train to the camps.

[dinodino]

Coopster, I will not vote Democrat. However, if Bush truly supports this, then he won't get my vote either. I'll abstain from voting before giving my vote to someone who's running rough-shod over the Constitution.

[rintense]

Why isn't that fact obvious to you?

Because I don't know a lot about guns. Sheesh. Give me a break. I'm trying to learn something here and a few of you have your panties in a twist over sincere questions.

[Mini-14]

Ok, my apologies.

[ApesForEvolution]

If Bush/his advisors were truly that bright, they would simply allow the sunset on this HORRIBLE legislation to occur. Even taking it on is suicidal to his re-election viability and subsequently our nation.

[thepitts]

If bush doesn't change his tune on this very soon I will not only not vote for him, I will start working to get him unelected.
I spent a lot of time working to help him win in 2000, I'll work twice as hard to change that.

[rintense]

To protect myself in my home. But if I can do that with a rifle, or a handgun, why would I need an assault weapon- presuming none of the scenarios listed in the replies above hold true.

I know there are a lot of assumptions. But that's why I am asking questions.

[Travis McGee]

Good rant.

[ApesForEvolution]

Maybe, truly, it's time to stop voting for half-baked constitutionists and get on with the final battle then? If our candidates are half-hearted about our constitutional rights, then why pass a horrible future on to our legacy? If the inevitable truly is coming but the rate of speed is the issue, why simply pass the buck?? A couple more generations of government schooled Americans and there won't be anyone left to fight in a CW. (The War between the states was not a Civil War)

[rintense]

I can't. That's why I am asking. Devil's advocate says that if I kill you, a trial lawyer is going to call my gun- no matter what it is, an assault weapon.

[MEG33]

What weapon would you ever ban a citizen from owning? I believe in the right to bear arms..