[John Lenin]

No big deal, for under $50 you can buy a kit to convert a semi-auto to full auto.

[SkyPilot]

If this is true, add me to the list of saying he is totally wrong on this issue.

[Merdoug]

Hey,...Bush has 78% approval with the country. And look at all of those Mexicans that he has welcomed into the former United States of America, who will vote for him next election. He does not care a WIT for us gun owners. As far as he is concerned, we can kiss his b***. He doesn't NEED our votes.

[ApesForEvolution]

Son of a B.

[xm177e2]

Repealing the assault weapons ban right now just isn't good politics, Bush has other things to worry about. The way to win the gun rights debate in this country is to keep pushing for CCW in new states. States that get CCW turn pro-gun. Then in a few decades the assault weapons ban will die a quiet death and few people will get very excited about it.

[VeniVidiVici]

Ok. I only read about half the posts since I have to run somewhere so if this has been answered, forgive me.

Just how, and what, has this "assault" weapons ban affected the sales of semi-auto weapons? I can go to a gun show and buy an AK-47 or 74; I can get an M16 knock-off at my local gun store (or the previously mentioned gun show); I can buy just about anything it seems.

So what am I missing out on? Rifles with flash supressors (a really dumb thing to ban)? Magazines that can handle more than 10 rounds (I can buy grandfathered ones)? A bayonet mount (whoever thought this should be banned is smoking something)?

Granted that ban was an idea of the left to get around the 2d Amendment. And in an ideal world nothing would be banned. But the reality being what it is - the obnoxious elitists of the left lying to a good percentage of American sheeple - I think it's better to pick and choose our battles or we could end-up like England, Australia and Canada.

The people of KA have a need to worry. It won't be long before the idiots in control there ban ALL weapons.

[teeman8r]

by supporting the current law, bush supports the sunset clause... by supporting the reauthorization of the current law, he also supports the sunset of this legislation...

all your political speaks are belong to us...

[Long Cut]

I've read most of this thread, and a few things are jumping out at me. Full Disclosure: The President is my Commander-In-Chief, so out of that respect and sense of duty, I will NOT tell him how to do his job, nor will I criticize him on this or ANY issue. Any disagreements I may have with him, and I DO have them, must remain private. That said, I am a proud gunowner and NRA member, and I would purely LUUUVVV to see this onerous law die, preferably painfully. However, some things leap out, to wit:

CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

This law has been referred to a lot on this thread, as an example of how the President should NOT have acted. So let's examine it. Does anyone besides me recall that CFR was deader than dinosaur crap until it was ressurrected by events (think ENRON and other scandals)? This is an IDEAL example of how random events can affect legislation. Add to the scandals the fact that the President and his party were in an all-out battle to retake the Senate and hold the House at the time. I make NO value judgements here, mind you, but only observe. Draw your own conclusions.

DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN

2004, Hmmmm. A presidential election. A weak economy. A Republican named "Bush" coming off a successful war with a high approval rating. An onerous "gun-control" controversy in the making...why do I get the feeling that I've been here before? And didn't the PREVIOUS President Bush's "gun control" controversy grow out of a single event, i.e. a massacre by a goblin using an "evil" rifle? Just musing...

CRYSTAL BALL TIME

2004. The economy is still weak, but the President's polling numbers are still above 50%, only barely. an upstart, young, and slick-talking Democrat is his opponent, and is rising in the polls. The President would like to be re-elected by a comfortable majority to set aside forever the "illegitemite, selected-by-SCOTUS" horse that the Left has been beating for four years, as well as have enough "coattails" to preserve and increase his legislative majority, putting a few Senate and House Leftists like Schumer and Daschle out of work as a bonus.

The AW law is due to sunset, and most pols, knowlegable of previous elections' turning on the issue of "gun control", are happy to let it do so, quietly. Only a few true ignorables, like Schumer, Fienstein, and Kennedy are making any noise at all about it, and to little avail. The President himself is saying nothing, letting the law take its course. Everyone's happy, life is good.

And, on a sunny Summer day, in a small town somewhere, a very sick individual with a heart full of hate is cocking one of several semi-auto weapons in his possession, whilst staring intently at a school, or a church, or possibly a mall...

A SINGLE EVENT is a-borning.

The President, and his advisors, cannot have failed to foresee this scenario. It must therefore be affecting their overall planning.

I DO notice that most of the statements that Mr. Fleischer has made are VERY "qualified": "Banning sales of assault weapons to juveniles"; "Banning the importation of hi-capacity magazines"...food for thought.

Bottom line for me, I'll give the President the benefit of the doubt on this one. He's not dissapointed me severely yet, and the prospect of having ANOTHER traitorous Democrat as a CinC makes me retch.

Barring unseen events, the AW ban will sunset. Those events could be a bitch, though, and we must understand that they can place ANY politician in a bad position. Once again, it will be the actions of an individual or individuals that is our undoing. However, as others have noted, we simply MUST let all our reps know how we feel, and ENSURE that this law dies its misbegotten death at THEIR hands, and that they must NOT place the President in that predicament again! They must learn to do THEIR jobs preserving the Constitution as well, IMHO.

Just my two bits, for what it's worth.

[Jhoffa_]

You did good in Iraq Dubya, but if you extend the AWB I am going to have a tough time casting a ballot for you..

I am not a Conservative because I support globalization and open borders. I am a Conservative because I want smaller, less intrusive and Constitutional Government.

To be honest, you haven't brought home allot of bacon in this department..

You're making what should be a very simple decision, very difficult when you trample our Constitution like this.

[PatrioticAmerican]

No votes for RINO, ever.

[Varmint Al]

For the last 3 plus weeks, the Military and News Media have been calling the so called assault weapons....

SMALL ARMS

That is just what they are and the assault name is a media invention. Have you heard the soldiers talk about "small arms fire"? Have you heard the soldiers say anything about assault weapons fire? I haven't.

[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.

[handk]

Why is it that a 20-year old American soldier can "posses" and "carry" (openly) an M-16 full-auto rifle, with an "evil" 30-round magazine in Iraq, and be honored, respected and treasured as a national asset, but take that same guy, place him on American soil, with a full-auto anything, and he's looking at 20-25 years in prison?

[c-b 1]

More Compassionate Conservatism.

[Dan from Michigan]

Maybe the rumor about GWB being a moron is true.

This is a good way to lose tough states like Michigan, Ohio, Penn, New Hampshire, Tennesee, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Florida, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico.

[Dan from Michigan]

To add on.

It's time to Freep Bush into backing down on this. Any extension of the gun grab will be unacceptable and will be treated accordingly.

WHITE HOUSE COMMENT LINE - 202-456-1111

[NAV1]

Can I still buy an AR-15? That's what I was trained on (M-16 variant of course), that's what I'd like to keep with me.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Bush Backs Renewing Assault Weapons Ban

Damn, I'm glad I'm not voting for him in 2004!

[Constitution Day]

Bump for tomorrow. More than a little pissed.

[FreeReign]

The president supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law," White House spokesman Scott McClellan told Knight Ridder.

Hmmmm, I've done a google search and have not been able to find a Knight Ridder byline that contains this McClellan quote. It would be nice to see the context of this quote for myself instead of letting the WP tell me what the context is.

Does anybody have the Knight Ridder byline for this quote? What reporter got this quote and where was this quote said?