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

Skip to comments.

The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban
Awbansunset.com ^ | Ryan VanOrden

Posted on 01/04/2003 7:39:01 PM PST by Jed Eckert

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-92 next last
It should be interesting to watch some RINOs squirm since the ban sunsets just before the November '04 elections.

Will the Republicans throw it all away again in 2004?

Opinions?

1 posted on 01/04/2003 7:39:01 PM PST by Jed Eckert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *bang_list
bang
2 posted on 01/04/2003 7:42:01 PM PST by Mulder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list
Bang!
3 posted on 01/04/2003 7:42:29 PM PST by Travis McGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jed Eckert
Will the Republicans throw it all away again in 2004?

If the past is any indicator, yes.

4 posted on 01/04/2003 8:01:39 PM PST by ActionNewsBill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
Bang yourself.

And yeah, Socialist Party R will no doubt keep the ban in place.

How's your book, TM? I don't visit these digs much these days, so I have no idea if you ever got it finished.
5 posted on 01/04/2003 8:10:40 PM PST by Jefferson Adams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jefferson Adams
I finished the manuscript last fall and now I am smoothing it and putting it into Word.

The title is "Enemies Foreign And Domestic."

6 posted on 01/04/2003 8:14:49 PM PST by Travis McGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jed Eckert
decimal point correction... 17 of 7500 is 0.23%, not 0.0023%
7 posted on 01/04/2003 8:20:06 PM PST by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
Cool :)

Hope I'll have some way to know when it's out and available.

Take care!
8 posted on 01/04/2003 8:24:38 PM PST by Jefferson Adams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jefferson Adams
What's up? Haven't "seen" you around here in awhile. I hope all is well.
9 posted on 01/04/2003 8:25:51 PM PST by Mulder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mulder
Hi Mulder, thanks :)

I tend to hang out on LF (doing my best to ignore and/or tweak all the Jew Haters).

Good to hear from you!
10 posted on 01/04/2003 8:28:22 PM PST by Jefferson Adams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jed Eckert
The demonization of so-called "assault weapons" has already begun. For the last month the Brady Bunch and the VPC have made it a point to dig out any police report where an "assault weapon" or anything the looks like one was either used or found or even MIGHT have been used in a crime.
11 posted on 01/04/2003 8:28:50 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jed Eckert
Predictions:

You will not write a letter to your Congressman and to your Senators; whereas the soccer moms will.
The law will be renewed in 2004.
The President will sign it.
You will vote for the Republican candidate anyway.

12 posted on 01/04/2003 8:29:46 PM PST by FreedomCalls
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jed Eckert
The resulting public outcry among the gun-owning community of the United States galvanized the gun lobby, and has contributed to the outcomes of every subsequent election. Ironically, this law may prove to be the beginning of a marked trend that unifies gun owners as a more homogenous voting block than ever before.

Unintended consequences.

Looking at the crime figures, it would apear that almost no one except the law abiding own, or ever have owned, 'assault weapons'.

13 posted on 01/04/2003 8:31:53 PM PST by templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jed Eckert
It's up to us. When the proponents to arm the pilots became vocal, no one expected it to ever happen. At the moment, the pilots are going through a "trial stage" to see if it works but it is a baby step in the right direction.

If the gunowners sit and wait until 2004 to see how their representatives vote on the bill, we already lost. We have to start now and we have to get all the gun groups working together.
14 posted on 01/04/2003 8:32:49 PM PST by Shooter 2.5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mulder
LOL - I just realized we're getting remarkably close to that time of the year when I write "The More or Less Annual Rape of the Union Address Report," which is what got me invited to LF in the first place when Jim deleted the thread last year in under 5 minutes < g >

I suspect that this year's Report will be a good one - mosey on over to LF maybe an hour or two after Herr Prezident makes his speech, it should be up there by then.
15 posted on 01/04/2003 8:33:05 PM PST by Jefferson Adams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
You will vote for the Republican candidate anyway.

Of course. The other side is so unspeakably evil that it would be unthinkable to do otherwise.

16 posted on 01/04/2003 8:35:10 PM PST by templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jed Eckert
Our best bet is with the House. If the House never brings it up to vote, the Senate won't dare bring it to a vote for fear of being left out on a limb. However, if it ever hits the presidents desk, he will sign it. And all the rabid Bush supporters will marvel at his prowness as he screws us in order to "steal another DemocRat issue".

17 posted on 01/04/2003 8:36:35 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jed Eckert
Will the Republicans throw it all away again in 2004?

The signals of whether the GOP will fumble this issue are mixed. I'll comment on a few of them.

The sad fact is that President Bush campaigned as someone who would rarely do anything that would make Katie Couric put on her little frowny face. Personally, I think the more often the little wench is upset, the more often America is moving in the right direction. Unfortunately, we have a president who wants people like her to say that he is "reasonable." I like President Bush in many ways, but I've thought for a long time that he was being far too accommodating of our enemies on gun control. (See This is Julie for my first writing criticizing him on this issue.) If the media puts pressure on him to reenact the ban and make it permanent, he will likely pressure the GOP Congress to pass the ban again.

The danger in supporting the ban for him is that he wouldn't be president today without the votes of many gun owners who thought he was better than Algore even if he didn't seem the staunchest of allies. He'll have much more support in 2004 from people who vote for the incumbents without thinking, but he probably won't be so secure that he can lose one of his key constituencies. If he signs the ban just before the election, he will demoralize many people who had supported him. If he demoralizes these people just before the election, he could still lose just as his father did.

For Congressional Republicans, the issue is trickier. They don't have the momentum and widespread unthinking support that a president will have. They will be facing many more voters back home who pay attention to things. If they support a ban, they will demoralize many of their supporters and will almost certainly lose.

For Congressional Democrats, the issue might even be trickier. There are many Democrats who represent relatively conservative, rural areas. Some of them originally supported the ban in '94 and almost lost that year because of that support. Some of them have recently won elections against Republicans who beat a Democrat in '94 because that Democrat supported the ban. They may be caught between voters to whom they promised respect for the Second Amendment and a party that is demanding their support of a permanent ban. They could be in trouble either way.

If there were any issue that could lead to the formation of a successful third party in 2006, this could be the one. If the GOP passes the ban, it will lose much of its support. Some people will quit voting for GOP candidates. Others might still vote for them but will not volunteer or contribute. Democrats who kept their promise to voters and voted against the ban may find themselves without good committee assignments or party support as the party takes revenge. Those who voted for the ban will have a hard time keeping the votes that kept them in office.

With both parties facing that vulnerability, a third party could make some progress. It would need to oppose gun control without seeming to advocate that everyone should carry M-16's down the street. It would need to oppose taxes but in a moderate way. It would need to be open to people from both sides of the abortion issue but generally lean pro-life. I think it would need to be strong against illegal immigration without appearing isolationist.

I Resolve for a Free New Year
Bill

18 posted on 01/04/2003 8:38:10 PM PST by WFTR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
. And all the rabid Bush supporters ...

Aren't they such interesting people?

19 posted on 01/04/2003 8:38:18 PM PST by templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Jefferson Adams
Please pardon my ignorance, but what is LF?
20 posted on 01/04/2003 8:41:11 PM PST by aberaussie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-92 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