Assault Weapon Ban?

This is a discussion on Assault Weapon Ban? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I'm hoping someone more knowledgeable about Congress can help out with the timeline. Let's say that Obama is re-elected and he makes good on his ...

Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 101
Like Tree79Likes

Thread: Assault Weapon Ban?

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array tokerblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    2,344

    Assault Weapon Ban?

    I'm hoping someone more knowledgeable about Congress can help out with the timeline. Let's say that Obama is re-elected and he makes good on his promise to reinstate the Assault Weapon Ban. What is the earliest that it could take effect is passed?
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the outcome of the vote." ~ Benjamin Franklin

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Senior Member Array mulle46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,164
    I don't think he would try until he can make the Supreme Court nominees. That said, I doubt a lot of legislators will agree to supporting it.
    You gain strength, courage, and confidence by every experience in which you really stop to look fear in the face. You are able to say to yourself, "I have lived through this horror. I can take the next thing that comes along." . . . You must do the thing you think you cannot do. Eleanor Roosevelt

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array Smitty901's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,285
    Well if you listened he said hand guns also.
    Sounds to me like he clearly came out of the closet again on the subject.
    He will ban all fire arms.
    The Old Anglo likes this.

  5. #4
    Member Array mg27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    457
    He did and has been talking about small arms, such as the small arms treaty with hilary C. with NATO.. He has to be voted out.Look at chicago, No carry, tough gun control, but the most shootings and violence..

  6. #5
    Member Array ritepath's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    SWVA
    Posts
    426
    Well he did tell Russia he'd have more flexibility after the election. He wasn't just speaking of Missile defense.

  7. #6
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,384
    I don't believe a valid estimate of a timeline can be made at this point. There are just too many variables unknown at this time. For starters, read the article on page 26 of the November 2012 issue of America's First Freedom. That's be a good start.

    For the record, this is not an NRA bashing thread, and it is not a political thread, so we'll keep it that way. Right? Right.
    shooterX likes this.

  8. #7
    Senior Member Array SFury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    757
    Well, the chances of any type of gun restriction legislation passing the houses at the federal level is 0. There are too many people that would lose their elected jobs if they were somehow able to pass anti-gun legislation.

    The support for gun ownership has increased quite a bit since the mid-90s. The more attacks, and large scale random killings that occur the more people think about protecting themselves. The media going after headlines and splashing violent acts across the various media forms actually fuels the desires of people to protect themselves.

    No, the irony of that last statement about the media defeating their own goal has not been lost on me.

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,316
    Quote Originally Posted by SFury View Post
    Well, the chances of any type of gun restriction legislation passing the houses at the federal level is 0. There are too many people that would lose their elected jobs if they were somehow able to pass anti-gun legislation.

    The support for gun ownership has increased quite a bit since the mid-90s. The more attacks, and large scale random killings that occur the more people think about protecting themselves. The media going after headlines and splashing violent acts across the various media forms actually fuels the desires of people to protect themselves.

    No, the irony of that last statement about the media defeating their own goal has not been lost on me.
    Except, of course, for "thinking people." They "think" that by criminalizing guns, extended mags, black furniture, et.al., we will put an end to gun violence. Facts be damned, they can "out think" any facts, reality, or proof.

    These be interesting times we're living in... And they could get a whole lot more interesting...
    Regardless of who gets elected.
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  10. #9
    Member Array torgo1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    420
    Obama did not promise to reinstate the AWB. He did not say anything about banning handguns. He's not that stupid, he knows that as little support for a new AWB as there would be, there would be even less for banning handguns. He brought up handguns in the context of explaining how the AWB is not the end-all of solving gun crime; in essence, he was agreeing that "assault weapons" aren't the problem.

    To repeat for the billionth time, there is no way that a new AWB could get passed. Because of the near unanimity of the Republicans and the half dozen or so Dems who would cross the aisle, the Democrats would have to own 65 (maybe more) seats to have a filibuster-proof bill. That is obviously not going to happen. Would he sign if it got to him? Sure. But he's not going to waste one minute working on such a loser.

    Remember folks, Obama dodged the issue like it was poison in the last campaign; if he hadn't been asked about it during the last debate, he might never have mentioned it in this campaign. He has not attempted a single piece of gun control legislation, even during the first two years when he had majorities in both chambers of Congress. When Holder broached the issue in a press conference, both the White House and the House leadership quickly told him to shut his pie hole. The Dems, with the exception of the true believers, learned their lesson from the last AWB. The Brady bunch has given him an F grade on the issue.

    He's not coming for your freaking guns.

  11. #10
    Member Array sigma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    38
    not looking to be political at all but looking at the facts I just dont believe there is enough support to pass such bans at this point. Romney and Obama have both avoided taking a strong stance on gun control and I see that continuing. Some interesting reading, both the gun industry and the NRA have absolutely thrived the last four years... alot of profit coming from the fear of bans...

    Gun Industry Thrives During Obama's Term In Office : NPR
    Darrow75 and rachilders like this.

  12. #11
    Member Array leecheater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Talmoon Mn
    Posts
    67
    torgo1968 , You hit it right on the head

  13. #12
    Member
    Array BaconHunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by torgo1968 View Post
    Obama did not promise to reinstate the AWB. He did not say anything about banning handguns. He's not that stupid, he knows that as little support for a new AWB as there would be, there would be even less for banning handguns. He brought up handguns in the context of explaining how the AWB is not the end-all of solving gun crime; in essence, he was agreeing that "assault weapons" aren't the problem.
    Last week I would have agreed with you. However during the second presidential debate last week, he mentioned both AWB and handguns. Youtube Link
    C hawk Glock likes this.

  14. #13
    Member Array torgo1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    420
    Quote Originally Posted by BaconHunter View Post
    Last week I would have agreed with you. However during the second presidential debate last week, he mentioned both AWB and handguns. Youtube Link
    Read what I wrote. He did not promise to reinstate the AWB (the most you can take out of what he said is that he'd sign it if it hit his desk, the same position as George H.W. Bush, and that's not going to happen). He did not promise to ban handguns. He didn't even propose handgun legislation of any kind. Merely mentioning the topic (which he did only because a citizen asked the question) doesn't mean he's going to try anything.

  15. #14
    Member
    Array BaconHunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by torgo1968 View Post
    Read what I wrote. He did not promise to reinstate the AWB (the most you can take out of what he said is that he'd sign it if it hit his desk, the same position as George H.W. Bush, and that's not going to happen). He did not promise to ban handguns. He didn't even propose handgun legislation of any kind. Merely mentioning the topic (which he did only because a citizen asked the question) doesn't mean he's going to try anything.
    I agree that he is unlikely to make a it a priority and it was far from a promise, but he did seem to imply an active role in the AWB going back into effect. "seeing if we can get the Assult Weapons Ban reintroduced." That says to me, more than just signing if it shows up. This mention of handguns is even more vague, but he does at least seem to consider their existence to be part of the problem. Then he did a bit of backpedaling to take the edge off.

    None of this is particularly shocking based on this past statements, but I guess I had hoped that after spending some time as commander and chief hanging out with generals and such, his perspective might have been altered in the last 4 years. I guess not.

    This week's version of Romney seems to be more pro-gun but who knows how long that lasts, and course president isn't decided on just one issue.

    On the original question of how long, at minimum nothing will happen until next year. The rest of this year is going to be budget, budget, budget, with maybe a bit of Iran and Libya thrown in.

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    3,554
    1:16:47
    "Weapons designed for soldiers ... don't belong on our streets" - the problem is his ignorance, when he says this he is referring to semi-auto only AR15's.
    "Part of it is seeing if we can get an AWB reintroduced"
    "Part of it is seeing if we can get automatic weapons that kill people in amazing numbers ..." - more ignorance

    Romney was also ignorant in his statement about automatic weapons.

    That said, any AWB is dead in the water.

Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

2013 assault weapons ban

,
2013 weapons ban
,
assault rifle band 2013
,
assault weapon ban timeline
,
assault weapons ban 2013
,
assault weapons ban timeline
,
assault weappon ban 2013
,

backpedaling on the new assault weapons ban

,
if assult weapon ban happens when will it take effect
,
soonest gun ban could go into effect
,
the president speech on the assault rifle band to take effect in january 2013
,

what happens if assault weapons are banned

Click on a term to search for related topics.