Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Delay Sees Assault Gun Ban Expiring in Congress
Reuters ^ | May 13, 2003 | Joanne Kenen

Posted on 05/13/2003 3:01:15 PM PDT by TLBSHOW

Delay Sees Assault Gun Ban Expiring in Congress

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - House Majority Leader Tom Delay, a proudly pro-gun Texas Republican, predicted on Tuesday the House will allow a 1994 assault weapons ban to expire next year.

"The votes in the House are not there to reauthorize (renew) it," DeLay told reporters.

DeLay's opposition to the ban puts him at odds with President Bush, who wants it to be extended although he generally opposes the expansion of gun laws.

The ban, approved during the Clinton administration, applies to military-style semi-automatic assault weapons like the Uzi and the AK-47 that have high ammunition capacity and are capable of rapid fire at close range.

A group of mostly Democratic senators last week opened a drive to get the extension passed in the U.S. Senate, and called on Bush to help, particularly in the House where pro-gun sentiments are stronger and DeLay wields considerable control over the agenda.

After the 1999 Columbine high school shootings in Colorado, the Senate passed several tough new gun measures. DeLay was instrumental in blocking them in the House.

Senate Democrats want to renew the current ban with only one change -- a ban on importing large-capacity ammunition clips. Their manufacture is already prohibited in the United States. Some House Democrats have outlined more far-reaching legislation that would expand the ban to other guns.

"The House Republicans are so out of touch that they are to the right of even President Bush on guns. Most Americans want fewer assault weapons on the streets, but the House Republicans want to bring banned assault weapons back," said New Jersey Democrat Sen. Frank Lautenberg.

Bush's support for the ban puts him at odds with the National Rifle Association, the powerful gun lobby that is usually his ally.

Another top NRA priority, a bill giving gun makers and sellers sweeping protection against lawsuits, recently passed the House and is pending in the Senate.

Several Senate Democrats Tuesday said they were determined to do everything they could to block the lawsuit bill, or at least amend it to narrow its scope


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: assault; bang; gunban; nra; sunsetprovision
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-108 next last
To: discostu
Here is pastrami info.

To make pastrami, you start by making corned beef. Corned beef is a beef brisket soaked in brine (with some sugar and spices). According to "The Joy of Cooking," corned beef "has nothing to do with corn but got its name...when a granular salt the size of a kernel of wheat -- corn to a Briton -- was used to process it." By smoking corned beef, you turn it into pastrami! Smoking adds flavor to the meat.

21 posted on 05/13/2003 3:42:10 PM PDT by lawdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: lawdude
Now I'm gettin hungry, you guys are mean.
22 posted on 05/13/2003 3:45:47 PM PDT by discostu (A cow don't make ham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: discostu
Thanks for the info. Now lets keep Pastrami from being banned! ;-)

ummmmmm.....pastrami

/homer

23 posted on 05/13/2003 3:46:50 PM PDT by Normal4me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BonnieJ
Please excuse my ignorance, but what EXACTLY is an assault weapon??

Turkish Bolt Action

And just about anything else they want to call "Assault Weapon".

24 posted on 05/13/2003 3:48:53 PM PDT by husky ed (FOX NEWS ALERT "Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead" THIS HAS BEEN A FOX NEWS ALERT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #25 Removed by Moderator

To: TLBSHOW

Ohhhh.. I don't know about that.

Somehow I can't imagine Dubya writing nasty things on DeLay's lawn in kerosine or anything just because the bill that will alienate his base and forever brand him as a 2A sellout never makes it to his desk.

In fact, I can imagine a phone call to the effect of:

Dubya: "Hey, Tom.. Thanks man, you saved me allot of grief on that assault weapons thing. You took lightning rod duty on that one and I want you to know that I appreciate it."

DeLay: "No problem.. happy to do it. Hey, don't forget to let me know how the consolation call to Di-fi goes."

Dubya: "LOL! Yeah, that one should earn me an oscar for sure! (begin mocking tone)'Well Di-Fi, you know I did the best I could for you dear' LOL! LOL! See ya Tom, have a good evening man."

DeLay: "LOL! Yeah, that'll be a classic.. And you too George, regards to Laura. Night. "

26 posted on 05/13/2003 3:54:25 PM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: husky ed
One interesting section in the new legislation bans
(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.
The feds could add ANY firearm, of ANY type, to the banned list by simply having somebody at some federal agency buy one. And almost ALL types of handguns, shotguns, and rifles have already been procured for use by military or law enforcement at one time or other. This clause effectively bans ALL firearms at the discretion of some future Janet Reno.
27 posted on 05/13/2003 3:55:22 PM PDT by SauronOfMordor (Heavily armed, easily bored, and off my medication)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: inthemush
So we can defend ourselves from the government, which is the point of the first half of the Bill of Rights. Might I recommend the Federalist Papers, they explain the why's and wherefore's of pretty much everything in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The 2nd Ammendment isn't about hunting.
28 posted on 05/13/2003 3:55:40 PM PDT by discostu (A cow don't make ham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: BonnieJ
"what exactly is an Assault Weapon?"

That's a very good question. It seems to be a any semi-automatic rifle or semi-automatic pistol that is scary looking.. You know, with doodads and handles or little sling swivels and stuff. The definition continues to evolve. Within a year or two, it could mean anything more powerful than a BB gun.

29 posted on 05/13/2003 3:56:34 PM PDT by GhostofWCooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: inthemush
Is this satire? The second amendment ain't about deer hunting, nor duck hunting, nor any other sporting purpose. It is about preservation of our freedom, and defense of self, home and country. it's not up to politicians to tell us what kind of firearms we *may* own. We don't need their permission.

I hope you meant your post to be satirical.

30 posted on 05/13/2003 3:56:37 PM PDT by .38sw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: inthemush
I don't understand the incessant need for semi automatic weapons. They're not needed for hunting (You don't deserve to be in the NRA if you need a m16 to kill a deer) and their only function is to kill people.

The main benefit of having a semi-auto weapon is if you have to deal with multiple targets at the same time. Like if you are defending your home during a riot or "civil unrest", or if you have a gang of muggers. The Korean shopowners who had semi-auto weapons during the LA riots made it thru with their stores intact. The unarmed ones were burned out.

31 posted on 05/13/2003 3:59:14 PM PDT by SauronOfMordor (Heavily armed, easily bored, and off my medication)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: inthemush
Hunting isn't the reason the 2nd amendment was added to the bill of rights.

Member since 5-13-2003, welcome to FR
32 posted on 05/13/2003 3:59:36 PM PDT by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: inthemush
I don't understand the incessant need for semi automatic weapons. They're not needed for hunting (You don't deserve to be in the NRA if you need a m16 to kill a deer)

Hey the 2nd Amendment isnt needed for hunting either. And why would you use the underpowered M16 (mousegun) to kill a deer when a typical hunting rifle is so much more powerful?

33 posted on 05/13/2003 4:01:37 PM PDT by PuNcH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: discostu
[Exhausted sigh.] Yes, I know. Pastrami is made from beef. But you said you can't make ham from a cow, and I was just making an observation about how some pastrami resembles ham, yet is still kosher.
34 posted on 05/13/2003 4:01:57 PM PDT by Petronski (I'm not always cranky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor
That's why I showed a pic of a bolt action and a M1.

These people didn't want to just ban AR-15's and AK-47's. They wanted to ban every gun in the country. And the AWB was just the start.

35 posted on 05/13/2003 4:02:37 PM PDT by husky ed (FOX NEWS ALERT "Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead" THIS HAS BEEN A FOX NEWS ALERT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: inthemush
That's your first post?

I suspect you're a re-tread.

(But, I know better than to argue the point.. )

36 posted on 05/13/2003 4:02:52 PM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: TLBSHOW
The ban, approved during the Clinton administration, applies to military-style semi-automatic assault weapons like the Uzi and the AK-47 that have high ammunition capacity and are capable of rapid fire at close range.

In other words they're machineguns...except they are not.

The ban itself is a piece of propaganda and it has to go.

38 posted on 05/13/2003 4:04:02 PM PDT by PuNcH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: inthemush
If you knew the reason for the 2nd Amendment, you would know that all military weapons are covered by it. If the US government was operated by honorable men, who respected and kept true to their oathes, there would never be ANY REASON for it to fear the armed citizen. Since it isn't, and the Founders knew it wouldn't be, they put some teeth in the Bill of Rights.
This scares some soccer moms and other squeamish little statists, so they chisel away at the 2nd continually. This scares the Freedom loving independent types, and thus the debate continues.

It also continues because the supreme court apparently cannot read.

39 posted on 05/13/2003 4:06:22 PM PDT by GhostofWCooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: inthemush
So you are siding against the constitution?
40 posted on 05/13/2003 4:06:23 PM PDT by asneditor (A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-108 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson