OUCH: "White House Favors Renewing Gun Ban"

Gun Owners of America ^ | 4/14/03 | GOA

[pabianice]

Bad News for Gun Owners -- White House says it favors keeping unconstitutional gun ban

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert

8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151

Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408

http://www.gunowners.org

Monday, April 14, 2003) -- In a surprise move this past weekend, the Bush administration announced its support for keeping the Clinton-Feinstein gun ban on the books.

The law, which bans common household firearms, is set to expire in September, 2004. But the Knight Ridder news agency had a startling revelation for readers on Saturday.

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

The "current law" McClellan was referring to is the ban on semi-automatic firearms and magazines (over 10 rounds) which was introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein of California and then-Representative Chuck Schumer of New York.

The ban narrowly passed in both houses and was signed by President Bill Clinton in 1994.

Most bad legislation lives on forever. But in an effort to corral fence-sitters in Congress, Senator Feinstein inserted a "sunset" provision into the bill. This provision means that the ban expires in ten years -- specifically, in September of 2004.

At the time, the sunset provision didn't seem like much of a victory. But it soon became clear that this provision would be our best hope for repealing the notorious gun grab. Recently, it was beginning to look like gun owners would have a better than average chance of winning.

Until the announcement this past weekend.

The White House's statement means that people will not be able to rely upon a presidential veto if Congress musters enough votes to extend the ban in the near future.

Despite the fact that both the House and Senate are controlled by Republicans, the majority of Congressmen are either fence-sitters or anti-gun.

It is quite possible that the gun grabbers can get 51 votes in the Senate and 218 votes in the House to reauthorize the semi-auto ban and make it permanent.

This makes the recent announcement all the more distressing. But Bush's position is not written in stone -- at least not yet.

Because the above quote was not made by the President himself or by his primary spokesman, Ari Fleischer, there is still some "wiggle room" that will allow the President to reverse course and do the right thing.

THAT IS WHY IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT EVERY GUN OWNER WRITE THE PRESIDENT AND URGE HIM TO REMAIN TRUE TO HIS CONSTITUTIONAL OATH OF OFFICE.

George Bush is President today because gun owners went to the polls and voted for him over Al Gore in 2000. Pro-gun voters delivered three key Democratic states -- Tennessee, West Virginia and Arkansas -- and with those states, the victory went to Bush.

This would be a horrible mistake if the President were to turn his back on gun owners and take a page out of the Clinton-Gore playbook.

Perhaps this statement over the weekend was a "trial balloon." We can only hope so. If it was a trial balloon, then we need to "shoot it down" in a hurry.

It is absolutely vital that we succeed in inundating the White House in opposition to this ban. This unconstitutional law must be repealed. Otherwise, it will be used as a precedent to ban even more guns.

Contact the President today. Please visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm

[TexasCowboy]

"you can tell a man's politics by his choice of caliber."

Hummmm........I thought the selection of caliber was somehow sexual in nature.
I had a choice of buying Viagra or that .50 caliber.
Somehow the .50 seems like more fun.

[AeWingnut]

1)Pro-Life. 2)National Defense.

Are the borders closed ? Do we still allow immigration from Islamo Terrorist countries ? Natioanl Defense luke warm.

ok, so he stopped funding abortion overseas. Correct me if I am wrong but didn't GWB say, "We should have less of them" Practically verbatim what x-42 said. Do we still have abortion on demand? Pro-life. -lukewarm

[AeWingnut]

enjoy your incremental tyranny

btw

was I wrong about the caliber ?

[wcbtinman]

When you meet your legislative friend, you need to pass along that there are more and more citizens who are talking about the scenario you linked as being a viable solution to the heavy hand of govt. If one extrapolates, I would think that the number of citizens who won't/don't talk about it, but who are thinking about it is more than significant. The gun issue is just one of the areas in which the govt is slowly creating enemies.

Let him know that we peons are rapidly running out of peacefull options. As the govt grows ever larger and more intrusive, our freedoms are being stripped at an exponential rate, and the breaking point is fast approaching.

You should have heard some of the conversations at the Knob Creek meet.

[budwiesest]

The truth is that Bush is going to lose these votes if he follows the course he appears to be currently advocating.

Nice post (#169). Given the way that the Gulf War (GW?) has exposed the Left as dictator appeasing surrender monkeys has me thinking that Dubya should not concern himself at all with the Lost Left but rather, take the reins (constitutional) and pull what is the best of America out of hibernation, (see New Deal freezer) thaw Miss Liberty out and put her on display once again.

Opportunity dosen't knock often and it would be a shame if it were ignored this time, given the make up of Congress and such.

[epow]

You can indeed replace the shell or body of a damaged magazine; one for a high-capacity Glock will run around $40; still pretty steep for a component that costs around $3 to manufacture- including equipment and engineering design costs.

What I meant to say isn't necessarily what I actually said. If I understand the AW law correctly, and I may not, if a pre-ban hi-cap mag body is damaged beyond repair, it can only be replaced by a body from another pre-ban mag. And since all hi-cap mags made after 10/94 must be stamped with an identifying number and date of manufacture, you could get into mucho trouble with the JBTs if you used a post-ban body to replace a damaged pre-ban body. But I haven't really studied the AW law that closely, so I may be wrong.

I don't have to worry about pre-ban vs post-ban mags, since most of mine are Wilson-Rogers 7 round mags that only fit my 1911 .45acp pistols. That's the beauty of the old .45 round, if you can't solve your problem with 8 rounds of .45 you probably couldn't do it with 8 more. Never the less, I am still adamantly opposed to renewing the unconstitutional AW ban.

[bybybill]

Right now, I own a 9, S&w .357 revolver, .243 Win, a sweet Swedish 6.50mm sporterized, weatherby 30.06, Rem .338, a couple of .22 rifles, a 16 gauge pump, 10 gauge goose gun and I`m looking at a 12 gauge over/under. Sold the M-60 last week

[Kenno]

I hope you're right. In my heart, I don't believe that Bush really is going to sign this bill. Nor, in my heart, do I actually plan to vote against him. That doesn't change the fact, though, that this is a real issue. I realize that there are plenty of posters willing to jump on Bush for the smallest things (and often things they'd otherwise support--look at how many paleos are still harping on Bush for supporting steel tariffs on one thread, then leaping to another thread to hail the glories of tariffs). Nevertheless, this isn't something we can just set aside. We have to tell Bush that he will suffer politically for this. And we have to do it now, before it has a chance to explode in his face during the 2004 campaign.

[Squantos]

ROTFLMAO !!!....Sounds like you have arrived TC ! Viagra, Rogain and a .50 Caliber.

Stay Safe !

[Dan from Michigan]

I think you greatly overestimate the number of wingnuts who need an automatic sized extension to feel like a man.

No, it's more that, "They banned that. Guess what? My Shotgun's next".

[Belial]

No, it's more that, "They banned that. Guess what? My Shotgun's next".

Follow your argument out to its logical conclusion.

What weapons can be safely banned without endangering your shotgun? Does every American family need an anthrax cache to stay safe?

[Godebert]

"If the law is unconstitutional, take it to court and kill the damn thing. I`m sure you can find enough "clear thinking" fellow wackos that would be as principled as you to fight this out.

" The so called hard core gun owners are basicaly nut burgers that are providing the ammo that the Bradys need to take away my guns."

I've seen kinder comments regarding 2nd Amendment defenders over at Democrap Underground. You claim to be a former Marine. Have you already forgotten the oath you swore to protect and defend the Constitution? I reckon those of us that take that oath seriously are just "wackos" and "nut-burgers".

[Eaker]

Let's just hope TC doesn't get them confused!!!

;>)

[Dan from Michigan]

What weapons can be safely banned without endangering your shotgun? Does every American family need an anthrax cache to stay safe?

Read Federalist 29 and 46.

Also, I can't bear an anthrax cache. It's not a "small arm"(firearm). It's a weapon of mass destruction.

All firearms should be legal. Doesn't matter if it is a derringer, 1911, .357 Mag , M1 Carbine, AR-15. Mossberg 590, AK-47, .50 caliber, .22 rimfire or .30-06 deer rifle. Any one of them can be used to fire their projectiles.

[alphadog]

I said..."If the ban is extended..."our president" be a one termer

You said..."I am sorry to be the one to break the news to you, but George W. will win reelection regardless of how many of our rights he tramples. That's just the facts."

No need to feel sorry, you may be right...I want to trust Bush, but I can't, one day we will see

You said "The branch to focus on is Judicial. We need to overcome the Dem obstructionists in Congress and get Conservative Judges appointed. I'm not positive that even with a super-majority in Congress Republicans will make this happen, but I contend that it is our only hope for saving the Constitution"

Agreed, but I don't think he is the conservative people thinks he is...Open borders, Amero's, and his stand to support the gun ban