Posted on 12/29/2001 5:20:14 PM PST by gieriscm
Anyone interested in ensuring that the 1994 semi-automatic rifle and standard-capacity magazine bans sunset, please contact me at SunsetTheBan@aol.com. I have some ideas to bring it about, and would like to start an email list (moderated, by invitation only) to discuss others. This list will not include yet another debate on whether or not the ban will expire in 2004; its purpose is to discuss strategy and plans for making sure that our legislators realize that letting the ban sunset is in their best interest - at least, if they want to keep their jobs.
Again, email me if you want to join the list. As I said before, the list will be moderated, people who want to join must ask to be added (this is to keep the trolls & anti’s out; no sense letting the opposition know what we’re up to!), and discussion will be limited to a single issue – strategy and tactics on making sure the sunset provision stays intact. Personally, I’m looking forward to purchasing 30-round AR15 magazines for $6 again after September 13, 2004.
Since Freepers are known for their activism, and are more likely than John Q. Public to be willing to work on their own, I'd especially like input from the pro-RKBA people here.
Eaker
As this is very close to the most repugnant, unconstitutional, prior restraint piece of garbage ever enacted, we should do whatever we can to ensure that it is not made permanent. The rats, of course, are looking to do just the opposite, with the "assault weapon" re-demonization going on now - HCI/BCPGV included making permanent the ban as part of their "anti-terrorism" recommendations just a week or two ago.
I'm with you, man - lets dump this turkey. Anyone that votes to extend it should be immediately tarred and feathered.
However, as pessamistic as I may be about prices, I wonder what you have in mind -- particularly considering the AWB was W's daddy's idea. Nothing Bush said during the campaign, or since his election, makes me think he will support sunset.
And send lots of letters to Daschale, Lott, Hastert, and Gephardt and ask them not to get this up for a vote.
And we all need to contact our congresscritters on this.
If he doensn't support renewing it, then he'll be breaking a campaign promise.
I've been to many gun shows since the ban was enacted and the only thing I've noticed is that "assault" weapons have dropped in price. Most weapons and magazines are still plentiful. I paid over $400 for my Chinese Mac-90 in '93. Now I see higher quality Romanian models going for $250.
Not sure where you've been shopping, but I know that three years ago I paid right at $300 for a Romanian SKS that had been selling for right at $100 prior to September of 1994. Same thing with semi-auto AK-47's. It's a supply and demand thing. The '94 AW ban basically froze the supply on foreign weapons and the price responded accordingly. The same thing has been true of full-auto weapons since 1986. That MP-5 would go for about $1,000 if we could buy one like we do any other long gun. Since we can't, and since no more are allowed into the country, they go for more like $12,000.
Sadly, you are correct. I recall Bush saying he supports the ban against "assault" weapons and large capacity magazines.
However,
Wouldn't renewing the ban fall in Ashcroft's hands? He is certainly a stronger supporter of 2A rights than Bush is. Is it conceivable that when the time comes to renew it, Bush would simply take a hands-off approach and let Ashcroft deal with it?
That said, what needs to be done is to make sure the HOUSE doesn't pass it. The senate is solid anti. The house could stop it.
Contribute, volunteer, join your local pro-gun advocacy groups, get involved.
Letters help. Volunteers manning booths at county fairs help more.
Actually, it's up to the Congress. The law has a final day (Septmeb 13, 2004) after which it is totally invalid. Unless a new bill is passed and signed into law prior to that date, then things revert to pre-94 conditions with respect to the importation and ownership of "assault" weapons by folks like us.
But part of a bill becoming law is the president's signature. And Bush has stated that he will sign such a bill back into law should it cross his desk. That's why the effort needs to be on preventing it from ever getting there, and thus the concentration on the Congress.
WFTR
Bill
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.