Walther Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
It still has to get by the House. I don't think they'll sign on to an extension of the AWB. They're a little more pro-gun than the Senate.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
[b said:
Quote[/b] (BreakerMorant @ Mar. 02 2004,2:05)]It still has to get by the House.  I don't think they'll sign on to an extension of the AWB.  They're a little more pro-gun than the Senate.

Exactly. The title of this post needs to be changed. The senate approved an ammendment to extend the ban. I have read in several places however that the house has openly stated that they will not renew the ban. The White House has also urged a clean passing of this bill. Hopefully we won't have to put up with this crap for another 10 years. I STRONGLY urge you call your state representatives and tell them how you want them to vote.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,209 Posts
Yup, this isn't over yet. Get on the phone, get out your pen and fire up that e-mail. Tell your Representatives what you think. This still has a good chance of dying. Check this out from Neil Knox:

March 1 Neal Knox Update -- The anti-gun crowd's sole focus right now
is killing S. 1805, the renumbered S. 659 gun industry liability
protection bill.
So why on Earth are so many panicky gun rights defenders (or people
claiming to be) doing everything they can to help the enemy?

Yes, S. 1805 is in danger of being loaded up with anti-gun amendments
in the Senate. But anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows
that the Senate is overloaded with anti-gunners and has been for several
years.

The only way to get the bill passed is to get it back to the House,
where it can be cleaned up or killed.

The identical House version, H.R. 1036, passed last April 285-140.

The Senate bill has 55 co-sponsors -- five more than necessary for
passage. Last week the Schumer-Lautenberg, et al, filibuster failed by
75 votes -- fifteen more votes than the two-thirds necessary to bring it
to the floor.

The day the voting started, the White House sent Congress a Statement
of Administration Policy calling for a "clean bill" -- one without
amendments. ! ; That's what President Bush has said he will sign -- which
greatly improves the chances of a cleaned Conference Committee bill
getting through the Senate.

Sen. Schumer fumed the Bush position will cost 10 or eleven Republican
votes against his and Dianne Feinstein's amendments. Let's hope he's
right, but I doubt it. Three or four might be enough.

With everything stacked against them, the only way the anti-gunners can
kill the bill is to load it down with a bunch of killer amendments --
causing the gun rights people to do what the anti-gun crowd can't do.
Kill it -- like our Nervous Nellies are already clamoring to do.

Schumer's "useful idiots" -- some of our people -- are in a panic
because Sen. Larry Craig and other pro-gunners signed a "Unanimous
Consent Agreement" allowing a series of anti-gun (and pro-gun)
amendments to be considered without a string of filibusters.

That's the only way the Senate ever ! can consider a controversial bill
--
but many of those screaming about "Unanimous Consent" think it means the
pro-gun side has consented to evil amendments. They haven't.

Sen. Barbara Boxer added an amendment requiring all dealer-sold
handguns to be delivered with a safety lock, as most already are.

The Internet is being flooded with emails from people I never heard of
--
forwarded by people who should know better -- demanding that S. 1805 be
killed because it "contains gun control."

Let me assure you: S. 1805 WILL CONTAIN A LOT MORE GUN CONTROL --
probably including the Feinstein "Assault Weapon" ban and the McCain gun
show-killer bill -- before the Senate's final vote.

But I want the Senate to hold their noses and send it back to the
House, warts and all.

The letters going out right now from misled gun owners to their
Senators, telling them to vote against S. 1805, were probably drafted in
the! offices of "Americans for Gun Safety" and Handgun Control Inc.

If not, they might as well have been.

As most of you know, I have been personally involved in every Federal
gun rights battle since 1966 -- as founding editor of Gun Week, editor
of Handloader and Rifle, Executive Director of NRA-ILA, legislative
columnist for Guns & Ammo, Shotgun News and other publications, and Vice
President of NRA for three years, until Charlton Heston beat me 38-34.

In short, I've been around this block twice. I have never seen such a
well-orchestrated campaign to kill a pro-gun bill.

Every Senator who voted FOR the Boxer/Schumer/Feinstein /Kennedy
amendments will vote AGAINST the bill. I want to see every Senator who
voted AGAINST those amendments to vote FOR an anti-gun bill, and we
should let them know that we'll never hold that vote against them.

Because that's the only way we can get the bill to the House, wherethose amendments can be stripped -- so the United States Arms Industry
can survive, and prices on the guns they produce won't continue to
skyrocket.

Am I absolutely certain that every anti-gun amendment can be stripped
off in the House-Senate Conference? Or else knocked off in House votes?

No, I'm not.

But I AM certain that if they aren't WE CAN KILL THE BILL IN THE HOUSE.

And from what I've been personally told, NRA will lead the effort to
kill their own bill if the corruption remains.

Yes, it's dangerous. Passing legislation when the Senate is against us
is always dangerous -- and it's difficult, but with the House and White
House on our side, it's doable.

Let's show a little courage, friends.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I stand corrected! Sorry for the topic, friends. Unfortunately, I cannot edit it (only the text!!)


Let's do whatever we can to stop it.

Val
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,209 Posts
It's dead. Here's what Senator Craig (My Senator by the way) and the NRA did:

Per Associated Press
http://famulus.msnbc.com/famulusgen/ap03-02-090616.asp?
t=apnew&vts=3220041254

"The National Rifle Association began pressuring senators to
vote against the bill after Democrats won votes on the two key gun
control measures. The 90-8 vote against the bill virtually ends any
chance for gun legislation to make through Congress this year.
''I now believe it is so dramatically wounded that I would
urge my colleagues to vote against it,'' said Sen. Larry Craig, R-
Idaho, the sponsor of the gunmaker immunity bill."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
All I can hope is that one agency will put out clear information about this issue.

P.S. P88 from Idaho? Where are you at, if I may ask? I'm currently in Boise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]the bill was killed and the dems can't introduce a new one for another year.
Can you clarify on this? What can they not introduce for another year? If its the AWB you may be wrong - I believe that the antis will do anything to get the AWB passed before Sept.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
I read that the antis can not re-introduce renewal of the AWB for one year after a proposed bill is killed

I got this from AR15.com, maybe I shouldn't have posted it, being hear-say and all.

 I'm just so excited




http://www.ar15.com/forums....&page=2


The Senate voted 52-47 in favor of attaching the AWB extension (another 10 years) to S. 1805 (the so-called "Gun Liability Bill"). They also voted in favor of attaching a bill to close the so-called "gunshow loophole", as well as a host of other crap. Senator Craig then got on the floor of the Senate, and advised everyone to vote against S.1805 (the entire bill, AND amendments attached to it). He said that it was a good piece of legislation, that had been turned into a monster with all the amendments.

The Senate then voted 90-8 AGAINST approving the bill. S.1805, and all its amendments, died right there. Good news, the AWB and "gunshow loophole" didn't get thru (this time anyway). Bad news: the truly GOOD legislation to protect gun manufacturers and sellers from junk lawsuits got shot down too.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=182951

Very simply, Feinstein's amendment to renew the AW ban has been defeated as it was part of a bill that was defeated. That the amendment ITSELF was passed earlier makes no difference.

The AW ban, as it sits right now, WILL sunset.

Congressional rules PROHIBIT a bill from being reintroduced in the same year if it is voted down, so the ban will NOT be extended, period.

Simplest possible answer: The AW ban will sunset. That is the result of today's activities.

CJ

Sep. 14 '04
I can't wait
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
CJ, thanks very much for that info...I'm now with you on the excitement and celebration


I just hope that the fall of the frivolous lawsuit protection bill doesn't end up hurting key manufacturing companies or forcing them to take ridiculous steps to make firearms "safer" that eventually force consumer costs up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
I wouldn't count on this being a 'done deal". If something else comes up that appears to have legs, they can always add an ammendment to extend the AWB as a rider.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
CJ (green5),

Thanks agian for the info. It seem to make a little more sense now.

Seems as each side won and lost, or nothing was done at all (as usual).

GO CONGRESS
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
[b said:
Quote[/b] (ASCI White @ Mar. 03 2004,12:54)]http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040302/ap_on_go_co/congress_guns_10

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
WASHINGTON - The Senate agreed Tuesday to extend a ban on military-style assault weapons and to require background checks for all buyers at private gun shows, defying the gun industry, the White House and the Senate's own Republican leaders.
What's the deal with the AR-15 site's info?
The news article you quoted is old info. The Senate agreed on adding the amendments regarding gun shows and extending the AWB. Once the amendments were made, the NRA told the Pro-gun Senators to vote the whole bill down. When the bill came to the floor, later the same day, it was voted down 90 to 8.

The rest of the AR post is regarding Senate rules for reintroducing a bill that has already been defeated once during a legislative session.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
[b said:
Quote[/b] (gmchenry @ Mar. 03 2004,3:11)]I wouldn't count on this being a 'done deal".  If something else comes up that appears to have legs, they can always add an ammendment to extend the AWB as a rider.
As of right now this is a done deal. THE AWB WILL SUNSET this sep. The way I see it, the antis can attach anti gun amendments to bills that "have legs", however they can not re-introduce the AWB for one year. So if we all do our part and let our representatives now how we feel about anti gun legislature, we won't have to deal with any kind of AWB for a while.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
[b said:
Quote[/b] (green5 @ Mar. 03 2004,2:52)]As of right now this is a done deal. THE AWB WILL SUNSET this sep. The way I see it, the antis can attach anti gun amendments to bills that "have legs", however they can not re-introduce the AWB for one year. So if we all do our part and let our representatives now how we feel about anti gun legislature, we won't have to deal with any kind of AWB for a while.
Not us over here in Krappyfornia
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
DJ E is right - individual states have the ability to create their own bans (as CA has done). I predict that at least a few states (NY, NJ, MD?) will make up their own version of the assault weapons ban when September rolls around.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top