OK, rather than continue to sidetrack the CD AR thread, I thought I’d start this one.
Some comments were made about CD not wanting to spread themselves out too far (a 7.62 version of their AR) because of the unknowns coming up this fall. I can appreciate that. However, why does everyone who’s concerned about another AWB actually believe there will be a grandfather clause?
It was also presented that, in light of a positive pro-gun outcome on Heller, that other statutes might not be revisited because there wasn’t any organization with deep pockets enough to assist in the fight. I could have sworn that is exactly what the NRA-ILA was created to do. If the NRA will not help in this battle, then why should I join or maintain my membership?
Who knows what will come with another AWB if there is one. The gun industry is a lot bigger now than back in 1994, there are more gun owners, and in the age of information politicians know they will be outed quick fast for supporting any such bills.
Granted, the left will try to push bans where they can, but generally speaking its going to be hard work to get any bans passed these days…
IMHO, a worst case is that the Heller case is decided in such a way that it allows all of those “reasonable” restrictions to stand. And, new ones to be passed.
My nightmare is that it’s found to be “reasonable” to restrict us all to 5 shot revolvers! :rolleyes:
In all likelyhood Obama will win in November and the anti-gun crowd will make a push for a more draconian AWB. It is doubtful that it gets anywhere because even the biggest anti-gunners want to keep their jobs and the lesson from 1994 is that there is hell to pay when you cross gun owners. I don’t think the Democrats are willing to trade an assault weapons ban for control of the House and Senate. They tried that once and didn’t like the taste. The nice thing for them is that it is an issue that they can scream about while pandering to their base but there is no real pressure to get anything done.
I suppose that there is a remote chance that the crazies will win the day and the bill would include confiscation, but I am fairly sure that it would not pass Constitutional muster considering the current makeup of the Supreme Court.
If the bill does include confiscation, someone still has to go out and confiscate the guns. Since most police and military are gun owners, it will become difficult to enforce almost to the point of treason.
I know I won’t give up mine, and won’t take from others. Hopefully we can use our own judgement and do the ‘right’ thing.
There is no shortage of JBT’s frothing at the chance to get into confrontations.
And even the non-JBT’s, the normal guys, if it comes down to their paycheck and their family being fed, or you owning an AR15 bet your ass your collection is going to get thinned by force…
I’d say this is far from a foregone conclusion. It’s at worst 50/50 nationally right now and if you look at the polls state by state McCain is leading or is well within the MOE in more than enough states to win the EC and at this point in a year where the GOP should get killed nationally that is very very positive. Of course anything can happen and all of the disgruntled blue-collar/blue-dog Dems could suddenly decide to vote for the hard core, smooth talking leftist and all of the obstinent “conservatives” could decide to stay home and cede their country to the looney leftist libs but I don’t see enough of either of those groups doing that.
McCain has a realistic chance to win the general, and most of the dems that are winning repub seats are acting (or at least talking) like conservatives thus I don’t forsee enough votes for anything close to the old AWB. Now you may see bills that close the “gun show loophole” or add other PITA hurdles to firearm ownership/purchasing but I’m fairly confident that the moderate dems have learned that the easy way for them to lose their next election is to support a gun ban.
That statement injects a large dose of reality into this discussion. And if we think the Marxists don’t know it, then we are being very naive.
Right now, the only thing between us and them is the Heller case going our way and a willingness on the part of gun organizations to bring suits in hopes to dismantle the current set of statutes on the books.
If Heller goes our way and we persist in attacking the other laws, then the Marxists will have as difficult a time at passing an AWB as social conservatives have at passing anti-abortion laws.
rmecapn, don’t give up your membership in the NRA just yet. They are doing a great job but they are stretched terribly thin as they fight the battle on a national level and locally in all 50 states. Heller had an “angel” and succesful court challenges are always going to need more than the NRA can provide, so please, contribute as much and as often as you can. There are angels out there, their pockets are just not as deep as the George Soros’s of the world who think civilian gun ownership should be relegated to the dustbin of history.
And to those of you that think confiscation is problematic in its execution, just imagine 4 or 5 nights of stories on the evening news showing SWAT teams going door to door seizing guns and arresting “non-compliars”. Sure, maybe some pokets of resistance will surface in places like Utah and Idaho, but the meek masses will be standing in line to surrender their guns, rather than greet the SWAT team at their door.
I used to believe that “it can’t happen here”. But I used to say that about Australia too. I am not preaching doom and gloom, but I’m no longer so naive as to believe that we in the USA are immune from such possiblities. A few more VT’s and a Columbine or two and watch your 2A be “reasonably” limited to bolt action centerfire rifles (no magnum sniper rifles of course) and single shot or over & under shotguns.
You are correct, my friend, and that is what is so terribly disheartening about our current culture. To me, the answer to VT or Columbine is to have everyone walking around looking as if they are patrolling the streets of Bahgdad. An armed society is a polite society.
The average American is eager to see the advent of socialism in this nation. They look to government to solve all their problems. It will be most intriguing to watch the “bastion of freedom” lay down peacefully and succumb to Marxism because they’re so self-centered and cowardly.
I do hereby promise to die standing, however. (I was born and raised in Idaho, BTW.) If my family cannot appreciate that, then they can pretend I’m just another Timothy McVeigh and so can the rest of the sheep.
I hope this discussion isnt going in that direction cuz I cant stand that issue. To say you cant own certain types of muzzle devices or 30rnd mags (accessories) etc… And not selling those items is one thing, but to just walk in someones home and steal a weapon that someone paid for with hard earned money is another. The idea of that is just WRONG no matter how you look at it.
No offence to you, that just strums a bad tune with me.
Very true. Convincing governing bodies of that seems to be the obstacle there.
Some people who play politics for a living and are on the Pro-2A side think that no matter who wins in November, as long as the Democrats do not get such a huge lead in the congress that they can ignore their conservative wing, not much will happen gun ban wise since a large number of the new Democrats getting elected are pro gun and often pro life conservatives and that the actual pro/anti ratio in the Congress will not measurably change even if Obama wins.
Second, I had a discussion recently with a fellow that basically boiled down to defining conservatism and liberalism. The short and sweet of it is liberalism emphasizes change (creating new laws or repealing old ones) and conservatism emphasizes resistance to change). He and I are of the opinion that part of why gun rights are becoming so damn hard to keep around is because we’re constantly on the defensive and constantly hammer a conservative approach. Unless we start getting a little more ( :eek: ) liberal and go on the attack, our cause will constantly be defined as those who are simply resist change instead of those who are fighting for rights. I don’t want to just maintain my existing rights; I want all of mine back. We won’t get that by playing defense all the time.
I am very confident that the D.C. Appeals Court is about to get the smack down from the Supreme Court, the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision will be maintained, and the handgun ban in the nation’s capital will fall. What I’m praying for now (this coming from someone who doesn’t pray) is for people to recognize this as the catalyst for a much more offensive approach and a move away from the defensive approach. Heller is exactly that: a liberal challenge to existing laws (status quo, whatever you want to call it) by law abiding citizens instead of criminals looking to get off easy. That is a damn amazing thing, and we need to make a trend out of it. If the industry itself got a little less “politically correct” (meaning more politically involved) and helped to fund these new cases, we wouldn’t need to rely on the “angels” who come around for Heller-like cases.
Variable said it right in that the gun industry is a lot bigger, a lot wealthier, and a lot more involved than it was in '94. There is a higher percentage of gun owners, many of them new, active in politics than there was in '94. There are a lot of people (largely liberal Democrats) who are gun owners, and feel betrayed by the '94 law. Lastly, in this Information Age word gets around very, very quickly. Anyone seeking to push a new ban of any kind is going to have the fight of their lives on their hands. I don’t think I’m overly optimistic, but I don’t agree that our future is full of doom and gloom. We’re in a much better position now than we ever were to ward off new gun laws and fight to repeal existing restrictions.
Correct me if I am wrong, but if I remember correctly the NRA has declined to support anti- AWB legal battles in the past. One thing that I really don’t understand is why there has to be so much infighting. Why doesn’t the NRA, JPFO, etc…join forces and unite as a single pro-2nd Amendment group intent on preserving our rights and giving the smack down to the socialist-elites who would take away our guns?
One point of clarification B, it was the DC Circuit Court that upheld the DC law. It was the DC Appeals Court that overturned that decision, declaring the DC law unconstitutional. The city then appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.
Please tell more about this. I am not familiar with the New Orleans laws and such (are they as bad as DC). If you have a link I would like to read about this. I find this situation one that is very hard to wrap my head around. Not calling you a liar at all, just want to be better informed.
