Assault Weapon Ban extension PASSES (Senate amendment to gun industry protection bill)

C-Span ^ | 3-2-04 | Sen. Dianne Feinstein D-CA

[Atlas Sneezed]

The vote was:

52 -Aye in favor of extending the ban 47 -Nay opposed to the ban.

[billbears]

Now Eaglet, remember if we have a 'super' majority in November then and only then will we be able to pass some more 'conservative' bills.... Hey that's about the only excuse that hasn't been proven false so might as well get as much as we can out of it until next year when it's proven to be yet another lie

[Sir_Ed]

Here's the letter I just wrote to Senator Gordon Smith.

Dear Senator Smith.

I am a life-long Republican, a two-term Josephine County Central Committee Precinctman, a many-years long Republican activist and I was horrified to learn that you voted to renew the Assault Weapons Ban.

Because of this, I will no longer ever vote for you again. I have voted for every race you have ever been in. I have walked my and other precincts for you, passing out your literature. I have driven Southern Oregon putting up signs for you. I have manned phone banks for call-a-thons for you, but you have received the last vote you shall ever get from me.

The AWB was a deal-killer for me, and I must tell you this...if we DO get the AWB and it goes to President Bush's desk, AND HE SIGNS IT, I and many others will sit out the Presidential Election, and not vote for him.

You may believe you can dismiss my sentiments, but I am telling you from personal experience, and from talking to many of my friends, the voters in Oregon that believe in Gun Rights are very upset about this.

I believe you will lose tens of thousands of conservative votes in the next election because of this AWB amendment vote. I also don't believe you will gain any liberal votes.

I am convinced that President Bush will also lose millions of conservative votes next November if he signs the AWB. I suspect he could be like his father, another one-term president.

Which is sad, as he is a good man and a good president. But there are certain principles so weighty that to violate them MANDATES that you cannot ever again support the man by whose vote they were enacted.

The AWB is one of those votes...which is why I will never again vote for, campaign for, walk my precinct for or run phone banks for Senator Smith.

By the same token, if it gets to President Bush's desk, I and many others will sit out the presidential election and not vote for President Bush in his reelection campaign, IF HE SIGNS THE AWB INTO LAW.

Sincerely,

XXX

[Hat-Trick]

I've just never been able to figure out why, to some people, the ability to fire-off a clip of bullets by simply a series of squeezes of a trigger is the ultimate test of liberty.

Did you read the essay I pointed you towards? It will answer alot of your questions. I ask this question in all sincerity - what do think the 2nd Amendment is supposed to protect?

Hat-Trick

[Mr. Mojo]

GW ....if ya sign this POS.

I believe the Prez said he'd only sign a clean bill the other day, so I'll take him at his word. Otoh, he has also maintained for a long time now that he'd sign the AWB renewal if it reached his desk. .....so it should be interesting.

[wardaddy]

or the reactions of the RINO/CINO members of this site.

Yep.

[MineralMan]

"Let's get this second revolution started while I can still squeeze a trigger, and remember why.
Amen to that!"

---

More empty threats. Nobody started a revolution when the AWB passed the first time, and nobody's going to start one now if it gets extended.

You guys are always saying this nonsense, when you actually have no intention of doing any such thing.

Guess what? The only effect these empty threats have is to tick off a few more people and convince them that maybe you shouldn't have those "assault weapons."

There's no revolution coming. You know it. I know it. The Congress knows it. Bush knows it. If a few individuals try to carry out these threats, we have a standing army that has _real_ weapons. Straggly bands of would-be revolutionaries haven't a prayer, and there's no chance in the world that you'll find enough folks to join you to make a bit of difference.

Give up the threats, OK? Try educating folks instead.

[Ohioan]

We've got gay marriages in California because of the ban on assault weapons? LOL

No, we have both--as well as a lot of other very unfortunate signs of the times--because of the same underlying cause. No one in Washington: no one in the media; no one in a position to rally the American people against a corruption of their heritage, is doing anything effective along those lines. The Administration has the Bully pulpit; but it is advised by the dysron Karl Rove, who does not understand anything beyond yesterday's statistical reflections of the propaganda with which we were inundated under Clinton. This whole disgusting mess could have been turned arond in a heart beat. It has not been, because of that unanswered Fabian Socialist propaganda, which played upon greed, fear, guilt and a sense of hopelessness.

Please take the time to rethink the idiotic Rove approach to Republican politics. It is not only cowardly and unprincipled. It is just plain stupid. (Karl Rove--Dysron, Quack or Mole?.)

I have been fighting the Left all of my life. I know which arguments work, and which do not. Karl Rove does not have a clue!

William Flax

[rastus macgill]

I hope you are right.

[Monty22]

Wrong, there was actually a revolution in the congress after the first AWB. And this time it'll swing the other way, as we are SICK of this stuff.

[MassExodus]

IMO, you are poisoned by your purist attitude.

Oh man, that's really sad.

A guy standing on his absolute 2nd Ammendment right, and you're castigating him as having a "purist attitude".

Perhaps you'd do all conservatives a favor and show us where ELSE you would so pragmatically color outside of the lines.

[freeeee]

Some of you folks come off not as constitutionalists, but as gun-happy goofs.

There are people at DU who have more respect for the Constitution and the 2nd than you do. They argue with the ultra-liberals of their party, who say almost verbatim what you just said.

[Joe Brower]

From the NFA website:

Magazine vs Clip

A magazine is an all encompassing metal or plastic ammunition feeding device incorporated in or designed to be attached to a repeating or autoloading firearm. The law restricts the capacity of magazines used in autoloading centre-fire rifles and handguns.

A clip is a metal device designed to hold or store ammunition in an easily portable package. This saves having pockets full of loose cartridges. With few exceptions (M1 Garand), clips are not designed to be inserted into a firearm to feed ammunition while the firearm is being shot. There are no restrictions to the capacity of ammunition clips because they are not in the firearm while it is being shot.

Cheers,

[backhoe]

Traitors!!!

 

http://www.nra.org/frame.cfm?title=.../www.nraila.org

 

www.awbansunset.

 

MichiganShooter.cOm

 

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/2429370

 

http://www.wmsa.net/people/neal_knox/040301.htm

The NRA's gamble lost. S. 1805 is now loaded up with a ton of garbage - gun bans, end to gun shows, mandated gun storage locks.

We need to burn the phones and kill this beast.

 

CSPAN thread for Tuesday 03/02/04

[Henrietta]

"I've learned to ignore most of these bots otherwise they go crying to the moderators and get you banned."

It's been tried several times, so far unsuccessfully. When warned by the admin mod, I invite the mod to read the posts to which I was replying before threatening to ban me. The last time I did that, (with cyborg) the admin mod actually apologized to me. It's kinda funny, actually...the 'bots actually have to lie to get the admin mod to take notice, and then the mod has egg on face for believing them. You'd think that they'd investigate the allegation beforehand, but I guess that's too much to ask!

[blackie]

I did the same thing Ed ~ Smith is a spineless wimp!

[need_a_screen_name]

If the dims return to power, it will already be too late. Who do you think got us to where we are with this issue?

I used to think that way. With the Dems in power, people will be jolted back to their senses. Or would you rather have death by a thousand cuts. Remember 1994? Don't you get the frog in the ever-heating pot analogy?

That said, I WILL be voting Republican if the AWB sunsets.

[Cold Heat]

Joe, you do not understand my position.

I see politics as a means to a much greater end.

These issues like AWB and soft money are parts of a much larger picture and by themselves cannot be given so much weight as to distort the picture.

Bush, as president, has stated very luke warm support for AWB and has set himself up to use a veto.

IMO, this issue will die in a election year.

The Senate vote was anticipated long ago.

As to 2nd amendment, all this is water under the bridge. The nine have not intervened and the commerce part of this seems to be in play, not the 2nd.

As long as this remains so, I do not see it as a threat.

The day that it is, I will will be on board. Disagreement on this is fine, but I will not be in fear of intangible and vague references to things that are not happening.

[stevio]

When the government fears the people we have freedom, when the people fear the government we have tyranny. We have entered the latter.

[MineralMan]

Joe,

You're confusing me with someone who does not already know the difference between a magazine and a clip. But, I see you've explained it one more time to someone who doesn't necessarily know.

I thank you for not calling him/her an idiot, though.

[carton253]

Another blame all our woes on Karl Rove post...