# proposed Assault weapons ban dropped....



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/19/us-usa-guns-senate-idUSBRE92I11G20130319



> (Reuters) - Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said on Tuesday that fewer than 40 of his chamber's 100 members support a White House-backed bill to renew a ban against military-style assault weapons.
> The scant support virtually assures rejection of the bill, a centerpiece of Obama's bid to curb gun violence in wake of a massacre at a Connecticut elementary school on December 14 that left 20 children and six adults dead.
> 
> "Right now," Reid told reporters, the bill drafted by Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, "has less than 40 votes."


more at the link

(and probably all over the net).


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

I took the easy way and copied my post from Current Events here, so Gun Folks could see it if they didn't go to CE.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

I think enough people saw thru it this time 

the AWB was like banning ergonomic gardening tools because they didn't look like something your grandmother used 

or ergonomic scissors because you could cut more without your hand hurting 

you can comfortably hold a gun with a hand grip or thumb hole stock on target longer with less muscle strain , part of why your seeing more and more turkey guns using them , if your trying to hold still while calling in a turkey for 20-30 minutes that last thing you need is your wrist cramping up.

and why the majority of modern target guns use a vertical grip angle , easier to get a better pull into the shoulder with less effort adding to increased stability


----------



## theuniquey (Mar 8, 2008)

I think what actually happened, is that the assault weapons ban just got removed from the bill currently being worked on. I worry far more about universal background checks, registries and taxes/bans/limits on ammo are far scarier and more threatening to our second amendment rights.


----------



## Surge223 (Jun 27, 2008)

theuniquey said:


> I think what actually happened, is that the assault weapons ban just got removed from the bill currently being worked on. I worry far more about universal background checks, registries and taxes/bans/limits on ammo are far scarier and more threatening to our second amendment rights.



I agree. I'm also worried that if they can't get the guns, they will go after the ammo. After all this time, the ammo shelves are still bare around here. Even the shotgun shells are disappearing.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

They will never stop trying, so keep voting for PRO gun people, and tell them *all* what you think


----------



## wildcat6 (Apr 5, 2011)

It is a good sign that there aren't enough votes however, all they have done is split into two separate votes. Thus making it easier to pass all the other garbage with the universal background checks etc...The other will be an amended vote.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

Could somebody explain the 'universal background' check thing to me? As it stands now, anytime I buy a firearm in any state, they do a federal background check. So...isn't it already in place? Whats the new proposal?


----------



## wildcat6 (Apr 5, 2011)

Darntootin said:


> Could somebody explain the 'universal background' check thing to me? As it stands now, anytime I buy a firearm in any state, they do a federal background check. So...isn't it already in place? Whats the new proposal?


Fed's want to do a check and register each gun every time it is moved. For instance, when you rgrandfather hands down that family heirloom firearm you will need to do all of this. Registration is very akin to a list for confiscation.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Angie,
Thank you for spreading the news. Maybe my letters to our senators complimenting them on their pro 2nd Amendment stances to date , reaffirming my constituency support of them, begging them to continue to stand strong as my voice on The Hill, reiterating the point that we need to enforce the laws already in place and without a full automatic selector switch a weapon was not a classifiable assault weapon and telling them how my anti gun aunt in San Francisco was taunting me with "As California is today so the whole Nation will be tomorrow " when she got on her gun control soap box during her weekly family conversational phone calls got passed around the senate and helped in persuading senators of other states to not support Feinstein and her pipe dream .

Although this battle is over, everyone prepare for the next skirmish and remember to keep reminding them to enforce the existing laws and if they want to make new ones make the penalties stiffer for felons in possession of weapons, not laws dinging those of us who own them legally.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

The ban was removed because they knew it was the only way they would get the background and registry in place... so in ways, it's scarier they did this.... 

New laws are just going to be creating a lot more criminals.. I know a lot of people won't be doing background checks to make a private sale.. That's why a lot already do private sales even though they can legally own guns.. because they don't want any paper trail... and hence the reason I only do private buys and sales..

The feds have backed off the bans, but I think part of the reason why is because they know a lot of states are taking care of the bans for them... it's becoming a fight at both the state and federal level for us now..


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

Just keep in mind Canada just dropped its national long gun registry. A: it was nearly useless, and B: it was wickedly expensive. No reason not to learn from our mistake. Goodness knows there are plenty more "how not to regulate anything type rules" in our firearms act, if you need to wiggle a finger at stupidity in gun control laws!!


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

You don't pay much attention to our government up north do you?

Wickedly expensive is no deal to our government... we'll just either print up more money, or borrow more from China to pay for it... 

The US won't learn from it's own mistakes, so why would they even want to learn from another's?


----------



## littlejoe (Jan 17, 2007)

Be aware people, that it might be a ploy to say some are moderate in their views, while they push their agendas through...maybe just a little bit at a time.

It has happened in Colorado. Sponsors have dropped bills outlawing military look alikes and concealed carry on campuses, and I believe it was to look moderate. They still passed meaningless bills for expanded background checks and 15 round magazines with date stamps required. THey are morons!

I've notified them, not only will I vote against them, but I will also campaign against them.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

I am wondering if this would be a good time to propose a bill that would make a hotline so that you could call and say i am bob then hand the phone to chuck the guy your selling your gun to he gives his info to the operator then the operator tells him good or bad then he hands the phone to you and tells you go / no go 

if they say they want back ground checks on everything this could do it without hindering commerce , or creating a list of guns.
but gifting to family still needs to be left alone , actually moving your guns into a trust can do this and make it legal any way that is how most people buy their class III stuff any way it can be passed down tax free with no problem because the corporation owns it not a person.

how about the "good guy/gal card" most states have concealed carry and cards if the person has their concealed carry card , selling to them should be no problem , even ILL has the foid card foid to foid should be no problem problem solved with one hotline and a bunch concealed carry and foid cards people already have


----------



## tyusclan (Jan 1, 2005)

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> I am wondering if this would be a good time to propose a bill that would make a hotline so that you could call and say i am bob then hand the phone to chuck the guy your selling your gun to he gives his info to the operator then the operator tells him good or bad then he hands the phone to you and tells you go / no go


No.

No more restrictions, no more regulations, no more gun laws. Nothing, zip, nada, zero. 

They knew the whole time that the AWB was dead in the water. The whole thing was a ploy to drop it (just like they're doing) in an effort to 'compromise' and get the universal background check passed. 

Nothing doing. NO compromise. Kill the WHOLE thing.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> *No*.
> 
> *No* more restrictions,* no* more regulations, *no* more gun laws. *Nothing, zip, nada, zero.
> *


Those are the *only *correct answers in this situation


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Pete,

I remember back in 1991 while at the range/gun shop where our intercompany shooting teams competed and the owner showed us a shipment of refurbished LEO trade in pistols he had gotten in.

After looking at the stock I chose a pistol I liked that was on sale.

Although I had on my person my carry license, A 357 under my pit, 38 on my ankle and a 45 in the small of my back, the range owner had to set my weapon choice under the counter with a hold note on it and we completed the sale and I paid for it.

Although I was licensed and already owned three handguns, our state required a 5 day wait for cool off in case the buyer was wanting to take a life or something .

As we completed the sale of the pistol I remarked how silly our law was because there I stood with three firearms legally in my possession and if I had any heat of the moment criminal action in mind I would simply use one of them and the range and shop owner agreed and said after a resident of our state purchased their first handgun the wait period concept was moot.

For the next 5 days I abided by our state wait period laws and got to shoot my weapon in the range and cleaning it while in the company of a shop representative.

I was sure glad when that law got dropped here and now I can go into a gun shop select the pistol of my choice give the shop rep my I.D. and ten minutes later after I pass the background and license check take my firearm with me.


----------



## dkhern (Nov 30, 2012)

its all about the background checks. according to the talking heads no one is opposed to them. they will attach a mag limit to it and imo it will very likely pass. 

as i understand the bgc it will be firearm restrigation. (which is against fed law - they cannot keep list of checks) i have no idea how this would be reconcilled. as they say the devils in the details.

since you dont need more than 10 rd to hunt the mag limit will sail on thru also.

va in ny has already said they will not forward info on vets mental issues to state as required under ny law. i believe hippa laws would also prevent medical info from being included in any data base used for bgc. therefore bgc will be on law abiling gun owners only. no mental health info so crazies still have same access they have had..

imo this is far more likely to occur than the awb. . . contact your folks in washington and state capital.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

I know , NO NO NO is what i want 

but i was thinking of it as a strategic move , if all the talking heads say it's about , back ground checks when we know it isn't and you can offer a way that everyone but family can be back ground checked , or if they have a concealed carry license just show the seller and walk with the gun. it probably isn't time yet 

and if in making them an offer they can't refuse it opens up the class 3 market why not hey they all got background checked. the same as they would other wise 

but in the event it ever looks like one of these BS bills is going to pass an amendment with an exception for concealed carry holders should be added. after all why would a person with a gun under their shirt , who is already checked verified and licensed to carry , need an additional waste of time and resources submitting to repeated checks when they already have a gun on them.

Shrek and I are thinking alike , why does my new gun need to spend 2 days in gun quarantine when i wore one to the store to pick it out. 

but for now NO NO NO 


and yes the devil is in the details 

think for a minute how many people would get a CCL if they could walk with their gun and no additional wait or hassle , in most cases it would be paid for by the gas of driving back to pick up your gun a few times.


----------



## Real Hawkeye (Jul 5, 2005)

theuniquey said:


> I think what actually happened, is that the assault weapons ban just got removed from the bill currently being worked on. I worry far more about universal background checks, registries and taxes/bans/limits on ammo are far scarier and more threatening to our second amendment rights.


Exactly right.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> if in making them an offer they can't refuse it *opens up the class 3 market* why not


Class III is a seperate category of weapons that have nothing to do with these negotiations
The "universal" background checks are nothing but a precurser to confiscation


----------



## wildcat6 (Apr 5, 2011)

:rock:



tyusclan said:


> No.
> 
> No more restrictions, no more regulations, no more gun laws. Nothing, zip, nada, zero.
> 
> ...


----------

