H.R.3831 a new front in the battle for the end of the AWB

[GlockHobbit]

Here is a quote from awbansunset.com

"2/27/04: McCarthy Compromises on AWB

H.R.2038, the onerous gun ban proposed by Representatives McCarthy and Conyers, while being a frightening read, is widely acknowledged as simply being a decoy, meant to distract gun owners from the real battle of whether or not the 1994 "Assault Weapons" Ban will be renewed, and is also intended to set up a situation where we are "grateful" when "only" a renewal of the current ban is passed.

In a move that indicates an acknowledgment that this bill has no chance at all of seeing the light of day, McCarthy and several other representatives introduced H.R.3831 several days ago.

Shockingly, this bill only appears to renew (for another 10 years) the "assault weapon" portion of the ban, and allows the "high capacity" magazine restrictions to sunset in September of this year as provided for in the original law. Clearly, these anti-gun politicians are hoping that, with the removal of the magazine ban, opposition to the AWB will wane as fewer gun owners feel they will be directly affected by the ban.

They, of course, will be proven wrong."


We can't compromise on this one people. It is time for us to call our Congressmen atleast 3 times a week demanding we get our freedoms back.

 

[Gray Peterson]

These idiots are really funny. They really think that gun owners here and in places in the NRA will accept such a bill. Granted, my biggest beef with it the AWB is the high cap ban, but still, the AWB deserves to die.

 

[HBK]

Yeah, then we can start working on repealing the 68 ban.

 

[SodiumBenzoate]

I'd rather have that go through than a full-fledged AW ban + mag ban, but it still sucks.

I mean, those folding stocks are really dangerous.

:banghead:

 

[TheOtherOne]

Shockingly, this bill only appears to renew (for another 10 years) the "assault weapon" portion of the ban, and allows the "high capacity" magazine restrictions to sunset in September of this year as provided for in the original law. Clearly, these anti-gun politicians are hoping that, with the removal of the magazine ban, opposition to the AWB will wane as fewer gun owners feel they will be directly affected by the ban.

It's pretty smart on their part if you ask me. Think of how many gun owners are going to be willing to trade cheap standard capacity 10/22 magazines for no bayonet lugs and folding stocks. This is something alot of gun owners and gun rights groups could live with.

 

[Gray Peterson]

It's pretty smart on their part if you ask me. Think of how many gun owners are going to be willing to trade cheap standard capacity 10/22 magazines for no bayonet lugs and folding stocks. This is something alot of gun owners and gun rights groups could live with.

It could be smart or it could be really stupid. That is if the House even allows any form of the AWB to even pass. It's not the standard 10/22's that are at issue here, really, but the handgun magazines for guns like the Glock 17/20/21/22/31/34 series. The 17 Can hold 17 rounds, the 20 and the 21 13 rounds, the 22 15 rounds, the 31 and 34 15 rounds. That's quite a lot of firepower difference, especially for the 17 (which is essentially 17+1). It's the exclusive handgunners would view this as acceptable, because the AWB doesn't really affect them, and has really crimped on their carry capacity for those who can't shoot small guns (like myself).

Then again, I'm not your typical handgunner. AWB needs to go down.

 

[starfuryzeta]

Does the language of the AWB portion of this new bill still ban based on the costmetics and particular name of the weapons?

DEVIL'S ADVOCATE TIME

In essence, if the AWB portion of the new bill stays EXACTLY the same, there is nothing lost, because we can't have them already. Besides, importers and manufacturers found ways around the ban. "loopholes" if you will.

Then, you gain back your hi-cap magazines. Woohoo, new production AR mags. 120 rd drums for $50. Thompson drums. AK drums for $25. New glock mags running $20 a pop.

DEVIL'S ADVOCATE TIME OVER

You know what, I think there are a lot of people that would be willing to see something compromised when they think they are gaining something back without losing something they've already lost.

I mean, given the choices of AWB + mag ban, or just AWB.....most people would choose the latter. There may not be a third option.

 

[thefitzvh]

Well, people here always say freedom comes in small steps...

CCW being one, this would be another.

I'd love it if the step was large enough to include the whole thing, but if they leave the ban as-is and remove the restrictions on standard capacity mags, then it's, IMO, a step in the right direction.


James

 

[bfieldburt]

Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory

This should be resisted will all vigor. The AWB renewel will die in the House unless people start thinking like this...."well, we do get something back". Fight this, totally. If we don't wimp out now, or give the politicians the idea that we are even considering this compromise, we can get ALL our rights back (actually, I still have them...they are God given)....it will ALL be legal again.

 

[Ironbarr]

No Quarter!

As I said in THE BIG thread, when you email/FAX senator tomorrow and Tuesday send a copy to the appropriate House committees and your reps. Saves time and let's them know in advance that we're coming.

And I agree - no quarter - do NOT dilute the effort, at this point in time especially.

-IB