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

senate.gov ^ | April 16, 2003 | Democrats Feinstein and Schumer

[TLBSHOW]

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

- Seek to Work with President to Swiftly Reauthorize Ban, Close Clip-Importation Loophole - April 16, 2003

Washington, DC - U.S. Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) welcomed the announcement that President George W. Bush supports the reauthorization of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, which is set to expire in 2004.

In an article published this weekend, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said, "The president supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law."

Senators Feinstein and Schumer, authors of the original assault weapons legislation in the Senate and House of Representatives, will introduce legislation to reauthorize the ban shortly after Congress returns from recess. The legislation would:

Reauthorize the prohibition on manufacture, transfer, and possession military-style assault weapons, while protecting hunting rifles and other firearms. Close the clip-importation loophole, which prohibits the sale of domestically produced high-capacity ammunition magazines, but allows foreign companies to continue to bring them into the country by the millions.

Preserve the right of police officers and other law enforcement officials to use and obtain newly manufactured semi-automatic assault weapons.

In a letter to President Bush, the Senators wrote: "As the original authors of the Assault Weapons Ban in the Senate and the House, we strongly believe that military-style assault weapons have no place on America's streets and should be banned. In 1994, we fought hard to win passage of the original ban, and shortly after Congress returns from the spring recess we plan to introduce legislation that would reauthorize it.

This is why we were pleased to see that your spokesman Scott McClellan reiterated your support for the ban and its reauthorization this weekend when he said, 'The president supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law.'

We welcome your support and look forward to working with you to gain swift passage of this legislation. The current ban is due to expire in September 2004 and in order to continue to keep these weapons off the streets, it is imperative that the reauthorization bill becomes law.

As part of the reauthorization, we also plan to include language to close a loophole in the 1994 law, which prohibits the domestic manufacture of high-capacity ammunition magazines, but allows foreign companies to continue sending them to this country by the millions. A measure that would have closed this loophole passed the House and Senate in 1999 by wide margins, but got bottled up in a larger conference due to an unrelated provision. You indicated your support for closing this loophole during the 2000 presidential campaign, and now, with your help, we can prevent the manufacture and importation of all high-capacity clips and drums.

Once again, thank you for your leadership on this matter. With your assistance, we will be able to pass legislation to continue the ban and help make America's streets safer."

[wku man]

"...Bradley tanks..."

Arrrrrggh! Off to the brig with you! 73 lashes with a piece of linguine! Off with his head! (lol!)

Sorry, dude. I'm a former Bradley driver, JAFO and gunner, and I cringe everytime I hear someone call it a tank. It's either an Infantry Fighting Vehicle (M2A2), or a Cavalry Fighting Vehicle (M3A2). It's basically a battle taxi with a buttload of weapons, whereas a tank has no provisions for carrying troops, and is a very fast, heavily armored life support system for a great, big, 120mm smooth-bore cannon.

Scouts 0ut! Cavalry Ho!

[TLBSHOW]

and how about teddy and hillary commie team up for more hand outs....

April 10, 2003
Senators Kennedy, Clinton & Reed Introduce Bill
to Offer Assistance to Unemployed Workers


Senator Clinton said, "This bill would provide critical assistance to the 1 million Americans, including more than 80,000 New Yorkers, who have already exhausted their unemployment benefits and are still without a job. Too many of these people have been out of work for more than a year and are being forced to liquidate their savings and sell their assets just to make ends meet."

The legislation would continue the extended benefits program which will run out in May for an additional six months, increase the amount of benefits to 26 weeks, include coverage for the one million workers who have already exhausted their extended benefits, and expand UI coverage for low-wage and part-time workers.

http://clinton.senate.gov/~clinton/news/2003/2003410C22.html

[wku man]

Sorry, I just read the rest of your post. The Bradley thing got me going and I never finished it.

Again, I'd like to answer the rest of your question, but this is not the time or place. It wouldn't contribute to the issue at hand, and would only serve to stoke the fires of those who think I and others of like mind are "one issue, knee jerk, wacko, gun nuts". If your scenario were to come to pass, it wouldn't be as hopeless as it may seem, though.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[ThirstyMan]

Ha! you caught me! sorry man. didn't mean any disrespect and glad to correct my language!

[Joe Hadenuf]

After all how can I defend against a tank without a proper weapon?

What a stupid question. And your diversionary tactics are clear. Just how many tanks do you think we have? LOL!

Do you have any idea? Do you have any idea how ugly it would get with literally *millions* of gun owners who would look exactly like the other side? Does a TC ever need to get our of the turret? How many rounds do you think a tank holds? Ever seen an army, weather organized or not, of 30 million people? LOL! You haven't really a clue do you......

[TLBSHOW]

its at both commie rats web sites Feinstein and Schumer

[wku man]

I wouldn't admit that here, bro. Some of the anti-gunners might be tempted to turn you in (only slightly joking there). But I know where you're coming from, nonetheless.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

...what kind of resitance are you going to offer at your doorstep with an automatic weapon?...

Those two clowns in Maryland sure shook things up, and they were bozos.

Imagine five million angry patriotic snipers. The government would collapse in a couple weeks.

[Joe Hadenuf]

I would guess that we probably have 1 tank for every 700,000 people.....LOL....And the majority of those are probably packing....Heheehe.....The American people would never go down like we witnessed the weak, gutless country of Iraq....Bet the rent my friend.....

[Joe Hadenuf]

I know, I checked. Like I stated, unbelieveable!

[templar]

In our militarized age of cruise missiles, Bradley tanks B2 bombers and F series fighter jets what kind of resitance are you going to offer at your doorstep with an automatic weapon?

About as much as a cheapo single shot smoothbore .45 pistol would be able to against an army of tanks, fighter planes, trained infantry, etc.
Of course, there could be a number of Germans that might argue about this if they hadn't been killed by a Liberator pistol ... and had their very high quality Mauser rifles, grenades, anti tank weapons, etc. 'liberated'.

There is no useless weapon in warfare as long as there are people willing to figure out how to use it effectively. It's the will that counts, the weapons only determine the overall body count on each side and how long it takes one to win.

[Dane]

Imagine five million angry patriotic snipers. The government would collapse in a couple weeks

You're whacked out. With remarks like that you give strength and succor to Schumer and Feinstein.

I am proud to declare that you are not my ally.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

Well I don't have any now, only the knowledge.
You can make anything from junk if you're handy and have the free time.

I don't think they're illegal unless they have warheads.
When I used to fire them I'd call the local cops and they'd come to watch. I always let them shoot a few. It's great fun for kids from eight to eighty.

[philman_36]

After all how can I defend against a tank without a proper weapon?
Barbed wire screws up the tracks. But "barbed wire" wouldn't exactly be called a "proper weapon" now, would it. That may be one of the reasons why the move is on to go to "wheeled" vehicles instead of "tracked" vehicles.
(it's not so much a matter of "defense" as of immobilization...that may be more information than you needed to know)

[ThirstyMan]

I'm not diverting the attention. I'm pointing out a principle of militia defense that has been promoted and raised by your side as the purpose of the 2nd Amendment. You don't doubt that do you?

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

The guy asks the question what could guys with rifles do. I answered him.

That's precisely the intention of the second amendment.

Don't worry, I vote republican in spite of you.

[Joe Hadenuf]

You're whacked out. With remarks like that you give strength and succor to Schumer and Feinstein. I am proud to declare that you are not my ally.

The only reason that poster made those remarks was that he was baited by these diversionary tactics regarding going up against our own military. It's pretty obvious.....

[Joe Hadenuf]

You don't have a clue. Do you have any idea how many vets are now truck drivers, mechanics, etc, that would look just like the other side? There are 10 times more vets on the streets than in the service! LOL....

It would be a nightmare for *any* army on earth to go after the American people......They would loose big.

This aint no Iraq......

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

It may have been diversionary, but I took it as an honest question and gave an honest answer.

Am I the only one who had American History in school?

That's exactly what my history teacher told the class when we talked about the writing of the Constitution, the second amendment was written for the purpose of enabling the citizens to fight the government, if and when it turned on them.

Have the socialists so destroyed our education system that nobody remembers that anymore?

[ThirstyMan]

I'm not proposing that one cannot kill with an automatic rifle and I'm not ignorant of the way guerilla warfare can wreak havoc on an occupying army.
Consider this:
Did all that stockpiled weaponry at Waco do David Koresh any good? My point is along those lines.