RADIOFR'S UNSPUN TONIGHT: That Pesky AWB

Do you support the legalization of marijuana and cocaine, or do you not believe in freedom?

Do you support gay marriages, or do you not believe in freedom?

We all have our limits.

My observation of who you are aligned with is based on the topic.

Tell me how President Bush is going to pick up one vote from the left or the mushy middle from this issue.

I honestly want to know.

The 1994 Ban on "Assault Weapons" makes illegal the manufacture of firearms meeting the bill's definition of "assault weapon". The bill specifically bans several firearms with particularly sinister and notorious sounding names, such as "Uzi", "Kalashnikov", and "TEC-9", which despite their military-like, futuristic (or, in some cases, hideous) appearance are functionally no different than other semi-automatics. In addition, there is a "features" test for determining if a firearm is an "assault weapon", though oddly enough, it is not based on complex ballistic testing, the power of the cartridge fired, or any other factor that has an effect on lethality. Instead, the ban defines "assault weapons" based on cosmetic and ergonomic design features that do not have any bearing on lethality.

Rifles

Specifically, a rifle is considered an "assault weapon" if it can accept a detachable magazine, and possesses two or more of the following features:

Folding or telescopic stock
Pistol grip protruding conspicuously beneath the stock
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor or threaded barrel
Grenade launcher
Among this list of "evil features", only one item initially stands out to the layperson as possibly making the firearm significantly more dangerous, and that is the grenade launcher. However, since grenades and the components to make them are already extremely tightly regulated as "destructive devices", grenade launchers are irrelevant. It would be a fair assumption to say that perhaps "grenade launcher" was added to the list simply to provide a certain degree of shock factor.

Other items on the list at least have some practical purpose.

The most amusing of these by far is the bayonet mount, which is the subject of an infinite number of wise-cracks (such as, "the ban has significantly reduced the number of drive-by bayonettings"). All joking aside, while a bayonet could be useful in either millitary combat, or a home defense situation, if anyone has EVER heard of ANY harm being committed by a criminal armed with a bayonet on an "assault weapon", please tell us about it.

A folding or telescopic stock allows the firearm to more easily be transported and stored, and would also be useful in a home defense situation where maneuverability is important. A flash suppressor reduces the visibility of the bright flash of light that is sometimes produced by firing in the dark. This would be very important for someone defending their family against an intruder in the middle of the night, as the flash would tend to temporarily hamper the shooter's vision.

The pistol grip, being perhaps the most "military-like" feature in appearance, in most cases is a necessity of the firearm's design due to the stock being directly in-line with the bore, as opposed to being lower than the bore as is the case with "traditional" rifles. Because the positioning of the stock in the manner does not provide for a place that the shooter can hold on to with the trigger hand, a pistol grip is used.

None of these things have any significant impact on how deadly a particular firearm is, and each is a legitimately purposeful feature.

Pistols

For a pistol to be considered a “SAW,” among other things, it must have the ability to accept a detachable magazine, plus two of the following features:

Magazine that attaches outside of the pistol grip
Threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer*
Shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned
Manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded
Semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm
*Note: "the ability to accept" a silencer does not mean these firearms are so equipped. Silencers have been as heavily regulated as machine guns since the 1934 National Firearms Act.

Features such as the barrel shroud and "semiautomatic veriosn of an automatic firearm" were obviously written to target copies of the TEC-9 and MAC-10 and similar type pistols. Again it seems obvious that the authors of the law were targeting the “aggressive appearance” of firearms, instead of functionality or lethality.

"High Capacity" Magazines

Another major effect of the law is the ban on manufacture of "high capacity ammunition feeding devices," otherwise known as normal or full capacity magazines. "High capacity" is arbitrarily defined as more than 10 rounds. Citizens must either pay exorbitant prices for "pre-ban" normal capacity magazines for their firearms, or use inferior artificially limited magazines. Neither choice is appealing.

Definitions

Below are the definitions, as written, in the United States Code:

Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 921 of the United States Code states:

The term ''semiautomatic assault weapon'' means -
(A) any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as -
(i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);
(ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;
(iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70);
(iv) Colt AR-15;
(v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;
(vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;
(vii) Steyr AUG;
(viii)INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and
(ix) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;
(B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of -
(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
(ii)a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii)a bayonet mount;
(iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and
(v) a grenade launcher;
(C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of -
(i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
(ii)a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;
(iii)a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned;
(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and
(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and
(D) a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least 2 of -
(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii)a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and
(iv) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.

Exemptions to the law:
Title 18, Chapter 44, section 922 states:
(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.
(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to -
(A) any of the firearms, or replicas or duplicates of the firearms, specified in Appendix A to this section, as such firearms were manufactured on October 1, 1993;
(B) any firearm that -
(i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;
(ii) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or
(iii) is an antique firearm;
(C) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds of ammunition; or
(D) any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than 5 rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine.
The fact that a firearm is not listed in Appendix A shall not be construed to mean that paragraph (1) applies to such firearm. No firearm exempted by this subsection may be deleted from Appendix A so long as this subsection is in effect

APPENDIX A CENTERFIRE RIFLES - AUTOLOADERS
Browning BAR Mark II Safari Semi-Auto Rifle Browning BAR Mark II Safari Magnum Rifle Browning High-Power Rifle Heckler & Koch Model 300 Rifle Iver Johnson M-1 Carbine Iver Johnson 50th Anniversary M-1 Carbine Marlin Model 9 Camp Carbine Marlin Model 45 Carbine Remington Nylon 66 Auto-Loading Rifle Remington Model 7400 Auto Rifle Remington Model 7400 Rifle Remington Model 7400 Special Purpose Auto Rifle Ruger Mini-14 Autoloading Rifle (w/o folding stock) Ruger Mini Thirty Rifle

Large Capacity Magazines
Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 921;
(31) The term ''large capacity ammunition feeding device'' -
A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device manufactured after the date of enactment of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but
B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

The United States Code also describes other types of firearms:
Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 921;
The term ''shotgun'' means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of an explosive to fire through a smooth bore either a number of ball shot or a single projectile for each single pull of the trigger. The term ''short-barreled shotgun'' means a shotgun having one or more barrels less than eighteen inches in length and any weapon made from a shotgun (whether by alteration, modification or otherwise) if such a weapon as modified has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches.
The term ''rifle'' means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of an explosive to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger.
The term ''short-barreled rifle'' means a rifle having one or more barrels less than sixteen inches in length and any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if such weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches.
The term ''antique firearm'' means -
(A) any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898; or
(B) any replica of any firearm described in subparagraph (A) if such replica -
(i) is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition, or
(ii)uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade; or
(C) any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading shotgun, or muzzle loading pistol, which is designed to use black powder, or a black powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition. For purposes of this subparagraph, the term ''antique firearm'' shall not include any weapon which incorporates a firearm frame or receiver, any firearm which is converted into a muzzle loading weapon, or any muzzle loading weapon which can be readily converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel, bolt, breechblock, or any combination thereof.
The term ''semiautomatic rifle'' means any repeating rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.

The term ''handgun'' means -
(A) a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand; and
(B) any combination of parts from which a firearm described in subparagraph (A) can be assembled. Exemptions as defined in Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 922
(v) (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.
(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to -
(A) any of the firearms, or replicas or duplicates of the firearms, specified in Appendix A to this section, as such firearms were manufactured on October 1, 1993;
(B) any firearm that -
(i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;
(ii) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or
(iii) is an antique firearm;
(C) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds of ammunition; or
(D) any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than 5 rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine.
The fact that a firearm is not listed in Appendix A shall not be construed to mean that paragraph (1) applies to such firearm. No firearm exempted by this subsection may be deleted from Appendix A so long as this subsection is in effect.
(4) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to -
(A) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty);
(B) the transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials;
(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving a firearm, of a semiautomatic assault weapon transferred to the individual by the agency upon such retirement; or
(D) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of a semiautomatic assault weapon by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary.
(w) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.

"The semi-automatic weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons – anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun – can only increase that chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons."

Those disturbing words speak volumes about gun control organizations' motivation and rationale for targeting what they perceived as "vulnerable" categories of firearms. Written in 1988 by Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center, one of the most extreme anti-gun organizations, this statement symbolizes the gun control lobby's desperate search for a new villain to pursue following a fading interest in Sugarmann's then pet project of banning all handguns.

Obvious and transparent, but brilliant nonetheless, the strategy introduced by Sugarmann's quote illustrates the clear lack of concrete reasons why these particular firearms should be banned. In other words, why are we trying to ban these guns? Because we think we CAN, that's why, not because we really think they are any more dangerous than other guns. It is only when you realize that the ultimate goal of organizations such as these is the eventual total ban of all private ownership of firearms that the movements to ban certain types of firearms (cheap guns, small guns, large guns, scary looking guns, etc.) makes sense, as each one represents a necessarily small step towards banning all guns. The fact that a relatively small percentage of gun owners possessed these particular firearms, combined with the above mentioned premeditated "bait and switch" exploitation of the public made "assault weapons" an ideal target for the next step in anti-gun incrementalism.

The assault on "assault weapons" really took off on January 17, 1989 when a deranged killer named Patrick Purdy opened fire at an elementary school in Stockton, California, killing 5 children and wounding 29 others and a teacher during his murderous spree. This horrific tragedy could have been avoided had Purdy – with his sizable criminal record and history of mental illness – been incarcerated, but that's beside the point. The gun control lobby seized this ripe opportunity to advance their agenda, placing the blame squarely on one of the guns used, a Chinese-made semi-automatic look-alike of the military AK-47 fully-automatic assault rifle.

The fact that this weapon's military-like appearance does not make it any more lethal than other rifles (and, in actuality, is significantly LESS powerful than common hunting rifles) did not matter. The gun control lobby, with their willing accomplices in the mainstream media, became fixated on ridding the world of this intimidating, frightening looking gun. Because the list of logical reasons for targeting these firearms is rather sparse (to say the least), the media relied instead on outright deception to drive home their desired point of the danger posed by these weapons.

For example, in his book, "Guns: Who Should Have Them?" author David B. Kopel illustrates this point by writing:

Persons who do not know much about guns may be forgiven for thinking that "assault weapons" are machine guns; these people are victims of what has been, in some cases, a quite deliberate fraud. For example, CBS's Chicago affiliate, WBBM-TV, showed a reporter buying a (then legal) semi-automatic Uzi carbine (small rifle); the report later showed an automatic Uzi being fired, and viewers were never informed that the guns had been switched.

and:

People who get most of their knowledge about guns from television may have different impression of the lethality of "assault weapons" as the result of bad reporting on the part of some stations. For example, in early 1989, when 'assault weapons' had just become a major interest of the media, a Los Angeles television station arranged with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department for a demonstration of the "awesome power" of "assault weapons." Using a rifle like the one used by Patrick Purdy in the Stockton shootings, an officer shot a watermelon that had been set up on a target stand. The bullet punched a hole the size of a dime in the watermelon, leaving the large fruit otherwise intact. The television reporter complained that the result was "visually unimpressive." The officer obligingly unholstered his service gun (a Beretta pistol, not an "assault weapon"). Loaded in the officer's pistol were high-performance Winchester Silvertip STHP rounds. He fired once, and the watermelon exploded into tiny fragments. By the time the "demonstration" had been edited for broadcast, viewers saw only the officer holding the "assault weapon" and then the exploding watermelon. Viewers were deliberately misled into believing that the "assault weapon" had caused the explosion.

And so the witch hunt was on. Later that year, California enacted its "assault weapons" ban (which would become a model for the eventual 1994 Federal ban).

The Federal ban on "assault weapons" became a top priority of the Clinton administration in early-1994, and was passed by a very narrow margin (216-214) in the House of Representatives (where the most resistance was expected). On September 13, 1994, about a month after being passed by the Senate, the "Crime Bill" (which included the ban) was signed by the president.

A few months later, Democrats were eviscerated at the polls, losing nine seats in the Senate, and a whopping 54 seats in the House of Representatives, handing over control of Congress to the Republicans. Among the casualties was then House Speaker Tom Foley (who, thanks to some last minute rule-breaking and arm-twisting, was largely responsible for the ban passing in the House); a district tossing out a Representative who holds such a high-level position of seniority and leadership in Congress was quite a rare event. In any case, President Clinton stated that 20-21 of the seats lost in the House were directly due to their votes on the ban. Considering that the Repubicans' post-election majority was only 14 seats, it is clear that Clinton's "assault weapons" ban cost his party control of the House.

Comparison: "Assault Weapons" vs. Other Firearms

The main intent of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was to make “military looking” firearms illegal. The supporters of the AWB believe that civilian versions of military weapons are more lethal than other firearms that operate in the same fashion, but do not look like military weapons.

Most of us that have reasonable knowledge and experience with firearms recognized from the start that the AWB definitions were primarily about the cosmetic features of the weapons and not their actual functionality or lethality.
This fact is supported by a quick comparison of a rifle that was banned (Colt AR-15) and one that was not. (Ruger Mini-14) Both of these weapons fire the same exact cartridge and bullet, the .223 Remington. Both are semi-automatic. Both can accept detachable magazines. Functionally, these are very similar weapons. So what is the main difference? The AR-15 has a black synthetic stock and looks like a military weapon. The Ruger Mini-14 has a wooden stock, and looks more “conventional.”

Before we examine the “Features Test” of the AWB, let us all acknowledge that every revolver, pistol, rifle or shotgun is a dangerous and potentially deadly tool. Regardless of the size, weight, caliber or color scheme, a firearm can destroy anything in front of the barrel when a trigger is pulled and the projectile is launched.
The AWB apparently attempts to make a distinction by creating a class of firearms that are, in some way, more dangerous than other firearms and therefore should be banned. The March 1999 report from the National Institute of Justice “Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban: 1994-1996” by Jeffrey A. Roth and Christopher S. Koper states:

"Although the weapons banned by this legislation were used only rarely in gun crimes before the ban, supporters felt that these weapons posed a threat to public safety because they are capable of firing many shots rapidly. They argued that these characteristics enhance offenders’ ability to kill and wound more persons and to inflict multiple wounds on each victim, so that a decrease in their use would reduce the fatality rate of gun attacks." (Emphasis added)

The supporters of the AWB believe that certain features on a firearm make it more “lethal.” By banning those features, the firearm would become less “lethal”, thereby making our world a much safer place. Of course, this line of thought ignores the only component which determines the lethality of any firearm: The intent of the person who pulls the trigger.

Those of us that oppose the AWB recognize the subjective nature of the features identified with the ban and argue that these features were chosen because of an emotional reaction to a few tragic, but nonetheless, anomalous incidents where military style weapons were used.

When we examine the banned weapons and compare them to weapons that were not banned, it is tough to find significant differences beyond the cosmetics.

FUNCTION OF ACTION

Many people not familiar with firearms do not make any distinction between a semi-automatic firearm and a fully automatic firearm. This is understandable, but the distinction needs to be made. A fully automatic firearm will fire multiple bullets with each trigger pull. These weapons are used by the military and law enforcement agencies. It is unlawful for a civilian to possess a fully-automatic weapon without special licensing from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. (BATF) This has been the case since 1934.

Although many of the banned weapons look like their fully automatic counterparts, they are not the same!

All of the banned weapons have a semi-automatic action. What this means is that after the firearm is fired, either a gas system or recoil system causes a mechanism to eject the shell casing and load a new round. Only one bullet is fired each time the trigger is fired. From a practical standpoint, a double action revolver could also be called “semi-automatic” since a bullet is fired each time the trigger is pulled. The only difference is in the mechanics.

There is nothing unique about a semi-automatic action. In fact, the semi-automatic action is more than 100 years old. This type of action is used in pistols, rifles and shotguns of all different styles and calibers.

AMMUNITION

The type of ammunition shot by these banned weapons is not special or unique; they fire a variety of different ammunition from rifle calibers of .223 to .308 to pistol calibers of .22 to .45. (For those that aren’t familiar with what those numbers mean, the caliber is basically the diameter of the bullet as measured in inches. So a .22 caliber is roughly a quarter inch in diameter.) These bullet types are not unusual and are used in literally hundreds of different firearms that are not banned.

COSMETIC FEATURES

Most people that have more than very basic knowledge of firearms recognize that the vast majority of “features” that define what an “assault weapon” is are strictly cosmetic and have absolutely no affect on the lethality of the firearm.

FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK

How short is short? The BATF requires that rifles and shotguns that have an overall length of less than 26 inches must be registered and owners of these weapons are required to pay licensing fees. All of the banned rifles and shotguns still have overall lengths of 26 inches, even if they have folding or telescoping stocks. All of these weapons were previously legal, and would still be legal if they had fixed stocks but were shortened to the legal limit of 26 inches. So, what is it that makes a folding stock so dangerous?

Proponents argue that folding stocks sacrifice accuracy for concealability and mobility. Most people familiar with these types of weapons would argue that a folding or telescoping stock does not affect accuracy at all.
The concealability issue is really questionable since it is legal to own a rifle or shotgun with an overall length of 26 inches. If, when the stock is folded and collapsed, the weapon is still 26 inches long, why should the type of stock be an issue?

Most people familiar with these weapons would acknowledge that a shortened stock can improve mobility. This is especially useful if one chooses to use one of these firearms as a personal defense weapon. Many SWAT teams and Special Forces units use very short versions of these weapons in situations involving urban areas just for that reason.
However, it must be noted that police and military units have NO restrictions on length. Some of these units use VERY short weapons with barrels only 8 to 10 inches long. These weapons would be illegal for a civilian to own without special licensing from the BATF.

PISTOL GRIP

The development of the pistol grip on rifles and shotguns is really an offshoot of improved ergonomics. It is just more comfortable to carry a rifle or shotgun with a pistol grip. When carrying a rifle with a pistol grip, your wrist is allowed to stay straight and inline with your lower arm. If one tries to carry a rifle with a conventional stock, one has to “cock” the wrist at about a 45-degree angle in order to hold on to it. This can cause cramping and fatigue.

According to The Brady Campaign “A pistol grip on a rifle or shotgun facilitates firing from the hip, allowing the shooter to spray-fire the weapon. The pistol grip also helps the shooter stabilize the firearm during rapid fire and make it easier to shoot assault rifles one-handed.”

Any rifle or shotgun can be “fired from the hip” if one is not concerned with accuracy. There is nothing about a pistol grip that makes this easier. If a shooter wants to hit an object, he or she must use some type of sighting device, otherwise it is pure luck. Unless you are a movie star.

Which makes one wonder what movies the folks at the Brady Campaign are watching. In real life, no one in his or her right mind would think of shooting a high-powered rifle or shotgun with one hand. That is an injury or accident waiting to happen. However, if your total knowledge of firearms is what you see on television or at the movies, it is understandable that one would conclude that shooting one-handed is effective.

BARREL SHROUD

When guns are fired, the barrel gets hot. Just how hot is determined by many things including the type of barrel, type of ammunition fired and the frequency of fire. Barrel shrouds prevent burns. That is their only purpose. They do not affect the functioning of the gun.

FLASH SUPPRESSOR

Proponents of the AWB argue that flash suppressors allow a shooter to be concealed when shooting at night. Anyone that has watched news reports of our military firing weapons at night, or has fired these types of weapons at night will recognize that flash suppressors can reduce the amount of flame that shoots 18 inches beyond the barrel, but they do not eliminate it.

on the border"...a blatant lie.

not

What facts are you basing your opinion upon?

I am against the war on drugs & support legalization.
As far as gay marriage....fine withm e...let them be as miserable as straight married people.

The ban is in place, this is not new legislation.

The people who object to the AWB will have to make a choice, that choice will have them either voting for Bush in the next election, or against him.

Reality is illustrated in post #117.

There are more people who support the AWB, than those who oppose it. Sacrificing the presidency to a Liberal will not only cement in the AWB, but will perhaps lead to more restrictive legislation in the future.

The bill must be killed in Congress, the risk of giving the Libs an issue to rally around, and the sacrifice of the presidency, is not worth it right now.

The AWB must be killed by Congress, not by the president.

Read back over my posts.

I've already stated them.

Expect another psychotropic addled teen to heed the call and embark on his Manchurian Candidate road to glory.

And that chick from the VPC will be all over it just like she was in Australia. Right before they came after their guns.

Now she's in DC, doing good things no doubt.

Let me re-state my opinion on gay marriage....I support the right of each church to decide which marriage they will recognize. If they choose not to do so, that is fine also....after all....it is pro-choice.

I saw no facts.

Evidently it doesnt bother you that the ban has nothing to do with machine guns and you will continue to argue as if it does.

Then post a single link to any statement of mine opposing better border enforcement.

And by the way, I will not support the violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

Not only do I support better border enforcement, but i support eliminating every measure of soacial welfare for illegal immigrants above and beyond emergency services.

APPENDIX A CENTERFIRE RIFLES - AUTOLOADERS Browning BAR Mark II Safari Semi-Auto Rifle Browning BAR Mark II Safari Magnum Rifle Browning High-Power Rifle

Well obviously a browning is not a full auto so autoloader doesnt mean fullauto.

See, they can go after a "sportsmans" rifle with this law.

"Evidently it doesnt bother you that the ban has nothing to do with machine guns and you will continue to argue as if it does."

More lies and distortion from you...it's a pattern.

Show me where I have discussed "machine guns" anywhere.

That's just too bad then.

The ban is in place, this is not new legislation.

But it will sunset if left alone.

The people who object to the AWB will have to make a choice, that choice will have them either voting for Bush in the next election, or against him.

So you're admitting that this will be an election issue.

There are more people who support the AWB, than those who oppose it. Sacrificing the presidency to a Liberal will not only cement in the AWB, but will perhaps lead to more restrictive legislation in the future.

Appeal to force, see above. I'm not afraid to make it clear to all members of the federal government that this is unacceptable.

The bill must be killed in Congress, the risk of giving the Libs an issue to rally around, and the sacrifice of the presidency, is not worth it right now.

You can bet your ass that many of us are doing our level best to do just that.

The AWB must be killed by Congress, not by the president.

Again, see above. But most of this is irrelevant with you as you support the bill. Check yourself Luis. You might be a liberal.

Guns made this country free and they will probably make your former homeland free as well. Not PC versions but ugly guns that could be banned in Miami.

Think about it.

From reading your posts, you seem to be of the belief that by "banning scary guns", you will take them off the street....

IDIOT

MY LEGAL SHOTGUN WILL DO MORE DAMAGE THAN ANY "ASSAULT RIFLE". AS A MATTER OF FACT, SO WILL A FEW OF MY LEGAL PISTOLS.

Luis, do you know anything about guns? If you say yes, prepare to be tested tomorrow.

You have mail. :-)

What is your exact problem (if any) with the AWB sunsetting in 14 months?