June 15th, 2009 03:05 AM
I think this is an effort to avoid validating the term "assault weapon" in the discussion of the banning of some semi-automatic weapons, and not others, especially on a cosmetic, non-functional basis.
Originally Posted by Chroode
Since the Congress presiding over the AWB sunset, the following legislation and resolutions have been introduced:
- To extend the sunset on the assault weapons ban for 10 years
- Assault Weapon Ban Enhancement Act of 2003
- To reinstate the repealed criminal provisions relating to assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices.
- Security and Fair Enforcement in Arms Trafficking Act of 2004
- Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003, 2005, 2007
- Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008
- Anti-Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act of 2005, 2007
- Child Gun Safety and Gun Access Prevention Act of 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009
- Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding drug trafficking in Mexico
- Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding drug trafficking in Mexico
As discussed, senior leadership in Congress and in the Obama Administration have expressed a sincere desire to ban some/all semi-automatic weapons from civilian ownership, consistently over many years, in word and deed. The threat is real, and clearly on-going. It isn't paranoia when they really are out to get you (whether or not they have been successful in the past). An examination of these acts appears to show that the Child Gun Safety act is reintroduced in the spring, and the AWB is reintroduced in the fall. The Child Gun Safety act has been reintroduced. It remains to be seen whether the AWB is again introduced.
We already know that this is a one-trick Administration, practiced in the art of creating and using crises to force legislation through without time for thought or the courtesy of open debate. We already know that the President is perfectly willing to make an absolute position statement one day, and a raft of exceptions to that position, the next (Can you say "lobbyists"? Sure you can. You say that very well.). We know that the members of Congress are practiced in the art of adding poison pills to vital legislation. We know that the House is capable of passing legislation without a single vote by the minority party. We know that the Senate is, for all practical purposes, filibuster-proof, given the cooperation of certain RINO's. I see no reason to trust this administration.
All it takes is the right event to trigger a national appeal to emotion, and suddenly, the President, Holder, Boxer, McCarthy, Schumer, et al, decide the time is right. The President says, crying walrus tears, that he hates including the AWB in this bill, but our need is too great and this other legislation must be enacted immediately or the country will never recover. The Brady Bunch and the mass media praise the Anointed One. The conservative media groans. The pro-gun lobby wails and gnashes teeth. The AWB is re-enacted.
This is why we must make clear, at every level, that we will not allow our natural right to keep and bear arms to be further abridged. And the Powers That Be (TM) need to know this before another attempt is made, not after.
By cbp210 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: November 26th, 2009, 07:05 PM
By DaveH in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: June 29th, 2009, 07:48 PM
By sigman232 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: June 19th, 2009, 03:09 PM
By Scott in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: January 4th, 2008, 01:17 AM
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors