The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old February 26, 2009, 12:20 PM   #26
doc540
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 30, 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,424
SURRRPRISE SURRRPRISE SURPRISE!!



Holder is not one to make a public policy speech without every word having a tactical purpose.

Addressing gun control issues was neither a foolish slip of the tongue nor an generic, offhand remark.

I said it before and am saying it again, they will use an event such as a school shooting, mall massacre, or Mexican drug lord violence as the catalyst for proposing what they have clearly stated is a core issue to them: gun control.
doc540 is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 12:28 PM   #27
jg0001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2007
Posts: 551
Just tell me this... under the previous ban, were ALL magazines that held more than 10 rounds banned or just those for certain weapons? i.e. would me 15 round mag for my Sig P226 be illegal if we were back under the AWB?
jg0001 is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 12:34 PM   #28
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 5,719
Quote:
Just tell me this... under the previous ban, were ALL magazines that held more than 10 rounds banned or just those for certain weapons? i.e. would me 15 round mag for my Sig P226 be illegal if we were back under the AWB?
Under the previous ban, magazine produced prior to the ban could still be greater than 10 rounds. Magazines produced after the ban could only be ten rounds though.

The latest versions of the 1994 AWB that were introduced in 2008 actually reduced the number to 5 rounds.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 12:36 PM   #29
Whirlwind06
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 3, 2006
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 752
NRA email tool

http://www.nraila.org/ActionCenter/
Select write your reps and you can fire off emails to all of them at one time.
Whirlwind06 is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 12:58 PM   #30
JWT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 16, 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 3,197
Didn't take Holder long to show his, and Obama's, true colors. Just sent E-mail messages to both Arizona senators (McCain & Kyl) and Congress woman Giffords urging them to oppose any AWB bill that is introduced.
JWT is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:02 PM   #31
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 36,327
WHOA! Who would have thought that this would happen?

I love how Pelosi says that the Bush administration didn't enforce existing laws when in fact the Clinton administration, which forced passage of both the Brady Act and the 1994 AWB, did virtually NOTHING to enforce those laws.


http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...009-02-26.html

Pelosi tosses cold water on assault weapon ban
By Mike Soraghan
Posted: 02/26/09 11:59 AM [ET]

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tossed cold water on the prospect of reinstating the assault weapons ban, highlighting Democrats’ reluctance to take on gun issues.

Attorney General Eric Holder raised the prospect Wednesday that the administration would push to bring back the ban. But Pelosi (D-Calif.) indicated on Thursday that he never talked to her. The Speaker gave a flat “no” when asked if she had talked to administration officials about the ban.

“On that score, I think we need to enforce the laws we have right now,” Pelosi said at her weekly news conference. “I think it's clear the Bush administration didn’t do that.”

Outside of the dig at the recent Republican president, that phrase is the stock line of those who don’t want to pass new gun control laws, such as the National Rifle Association.

The White House declined to comment on Holder's remarks, referring reporters to the Department of Justice. The DoJ did not respond to The Hill's request for comment.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:03 PM   #32
USAFNoDak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 21, 2000
Location: Minnesota, Twin Cities
Posts: 1,048
No Surprises Here.

Any gun owner who voted for this fool and his band of merrymen should have understood that with a decidedly anti gun majority in both houses of congress, and a wolf in sheeps clothing (regarding gun rights) named Barack Obama, that he'd move quickly to implement a new ban on assault weapons. There were enough hints during the campaign, as well as his previous record to look at. This was a slam dunk for him, Reid, and Pelosi. And Joe Biden has never seen a gun control bill he didn't kiss and fondle until his hair plugs stood on end. I'm guessing most of us here understood that this was coming sooner, rather than later.
__________________
"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams.

Last edited by USAFNoDak; February 26, 2009 at 01:04 PM. Reason: clarity and punctuation.
USAFNoDak is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:03 PM   #33
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 36,327
Oh, and FAR more acceptable, Doc540.

Even Gomer approves...
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:03 PM   #34
Vanya
Staff
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 4,030
Quote:
Do Not Panic!

There is, as yet, no pending legislation.
Yah... given the timing (just as they're handing out still more vast sums of freshly printed money to the banks), this feels a lot like "pandering to the base," i.e. trying to distract a lot of folks on the left who voted for Mr. Obama under the impression that he was some sort of progressive, rather than yet another center-right politician who's owned by Wall Street.

As Speaker Pelosi's comments make clear, Democrats in Congress DO realize that this is a non-starter.

Emails sent, anyway, to the nice folks in D.C....

Last edited by Vanya; February 26, 2009 at 01:36 PM. Reason: punctuation... oh. horrors.
Vanya is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:11 PM   #35
Another User Name
Member
 
Join Date: July 19, 2007
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 84
What weapons were banned under the "Assault" Weapons Ban.
Wasn't it like 19 types?

Were AR-15's banned for 10 years? I had no idea.
I had read something a while back that the Assault term will be broadened if they try to push the ban.

Why is it the legal gun owners fault that Mexico has a problem with cartels and our Federal govt can't control the border and trafficking. So the problem isn't addressed. The Federal govt is to protect our borders and protect it's citizens, not try and fix the problem by taking our guns away.
Another User Name is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:12 PM   #36
vranasaurus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 16, 2008
Posts: 1,175
Quote:
This was a slam dunk for him, Reid, and Pelosi.
Hasn't Senator Reid been publicly opposed to reinstating the AWB?
vranasaurus is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:14 PM   #37
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,092
The media drives the public to this with their misinformation, and propaganda. This is where the battle must be fought, as well as in the congress. If gun rights activist were to send not one, but TWO letters, it would be exponentially more effective.

The first letter should go to you representatives in congress, and the second to any SPONSOR of any network running the propaganda. Let the SPONSORS know that their financial support of anti-constitutional propaganda comes with a a heavy price. Tell them that you will boycott any service or product that their corporations or any of their underlings produce or provide.

Corporations are responsible to their stockholders, legally, and otherwise. Using corporate funds to promote their political agendas should not be tolerated. I guarantee that if a sponsor KNEW they would be the subject of scorn by a significant portion of the population, they would think twice about forking over millions for network sponsorship.

We have to hit them where it hurts.

And we need both a carrot and a stick. I just described the stick. The carrot could be: if you hear a network run a story or documentary favorable to our cause, send an email to their sponsor explaining that you appreciate their sponsorship, and that it will positively impact your future buying decisions.

Last edited by maestro pistolero; February 26, 2009 at 01:32 PM.
maestro pistolero is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:21 PM   #38
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,092
I hate to say it, and it's way too risky to be adopted as a strategy, but if the WORST were to happen, and they got their ban, there may be a silver lining.

There would then be an opportunity to get a SCOTUS ruling, once and for all, that civilian (semi-auto) versions of standard military small arms are protected, due to their direct relationship to militia use. Wouldn't THAT be nice?

I am unaware of any other scenario that would set up a SCOTUS case so directly.

Believe me, I don't wish for it, because it could be disaster. But Heller could have been a disaster, too.
maestro pistolero is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:22 PM   #39
dabigguns357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2008
Location: Ona,West Virginia
Posts: 1,215
Hey did you all see the follow up story about

U.S. Guns Arming Mexican Drug Gangs; Second Amendment to Blame?

Mexico's strict gun laws are being subverted by the easy availability of weapons in the U.S., the Mexican attorney general, Eduardo Medina-Mora Icaza, told ABC News. "The Second Amendment," said the attorney general, "is certainly not designed to arm and give fire power to organized crime abroad."

More than 3,400 people have been killed by the drug cartels in the last 15 months, 2,000 of them law enforcement officials, according to the Mexican attorney general.

U.S. and Mexican officials say they have traced most of the thousands of high-powered weapons seized from the drug cartels to gun dealers in Texas, California and Arizona.
dabigguns357 is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:28 PM   #40
trailgator
Member
 
Join Date: August 4, 2005
Location: Missouri
Posts: 59
Quote:
Despite the new administration's pre-election pledges to the contrary, Attorney General Holder has confirmed law-abiding firearms owners' worst fears and has stated that President Obama will seek a new so-called "assault weapons" ban (AWB). (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1)

As Governor of Virginia you were a friend of the law-abiding firearms owner -- I urge you not to abandon gunowners nationwide and do everything you can to block this new legislative boondogle when it is introduced.

As you know, such laws only serve to impact the rights of those who are law-abiding in the first place. Not even the Federal Bureau of Investigation could find any evidence that President Clinton's 1994 AWB did the slightest thing to make Americans safer by reducing crime.

Now we're being told that not only would a new AWB make American safer, it would also help make Mexico safer by supposedly interdicting the supply of firearms to that nation's drug cartels. Since when is Mexico's inability to control its own internal crime problems a recipe for Americans to surrender even more of their Second Amendment rights?

Again, I urge you to do everything that you can to prevent this bill from ever becoming law.

Sincerely,
VERY well put, Mike. I hope you didn't copyright it. A Missouri rep and 2 senators just got the same letter. (different name of course). You know what they say: "Plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery"
trailgator is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:29 PM   #41
jakeswensonmt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2006
Location: Western Montana
Posts: 913
Quote:
The media drives the public to this with their misinformation, and propoganda.
I just watched a "news" cycle on one of the Obama propaganda networks (MSNBC.) Not a word about the AWB, just more glowing Obama butt-smooching and lies.
jakeswensonmt is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:34 PM   #42
Vanya
Staff
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 4,030
dabigguns357

Quote:
did you all see the follow up story
I think this is what maestro pistolero was referring to in his post on media propaganda, about which he's quite right, BTW.

Of course, this still leaves the question of who's feeding the media this "OMG GUNS ARE GOING TO MEXICO!!" stuff...
Vanya is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:39 PM   #43
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,174
Do ya love the infighting here:

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...009-02-26.html

Pelosi knows there is an election cycle coming up and she wants to keep her seat..

Attention corrupt dealers in the great southwest.....they know who you are, watch indictments come left and right

WildcloseemdownAlaska ™
Wildalaska is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:40 PM   #44
USAFNoDak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 21, 2000
Location: Minnesota, Twin Cities
Posts: 1,048
Quote:
Hasn't Senator Reid been publicly opposed to reinstating the AWB?
I don't know. If he has, I haven't seen it. I guess I made the mistake of "assuming" he'd follow suit with the democratic leadership and sign onto it. I guess we'll have to see. Does anyone have any examples of public statements made by Dingy Harry regarding assault weapons and the banning of same?
__________________
"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams.
USAFNoDak is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:42 PM   #45
bclark1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,531
That sure came a lot faster than I expected. Not surprising, but I thought they'd wait a bit to gage next election prospects and make this either an end-of-term or second-term initiative. I don't take Pelosi's resistance as an indication she's suffering from an acute infection of common sense, but rather that she realizes the smorgasbord powergrab going on is burning all the Dem's political capital about two years too early.

Hopefully the bill would/will get smacked down. I don't want to bank on getting a ruling favoring bayonet lugs and pistol grips.

So who's going to give Gaffemaster Joey a buzz and let him know that Beretta makes hi-cap handguns and carbines? (Are we still in violation for talking politics if the administration forced the hand? It's only self-defense, right? )
bclark1 is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:46 PM   #46
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 36,327
"The Second Amendment," said the attorney general, "is certainly not designed to arm and give fire power to organized crime abroad."


And I don't recall our Constitution being written in a manner conducive to helping a foreign nation control its criminal elements when, in fact, they have never been able to do so.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:49 PM   #47
rantingredneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 12, 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,728
To the President:

Quote:
President Obama:
I am a registered Independent who did not vote for you. I am willing, however, to give you a chance make good on your promise to "change" Washington and usher in a "post-partisan" era. In short, you have an opportunity to gain my trust.

I am writing to express my concern at the announcement by Attorney General Holder that the Administration will be seeking renewal of the so called "assault" weapons ban. As a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution as recently affirmed by Heller, I encourage you to do all possible to block any legislative efforts aimed at infringing this constitutionally protected right.

As you know, such laws only serve to impact the rights of those who are law-abiding in the first place. Not even the Federal Bureau of Investigation could find any evidence that President Clinton's 1994 AWB did the slightest thing to make Americans safer by reducing crime.

Now we're being told that not only would a new AWB make America safer, it would also help make Mexico safer by supposedly interdicting the supply of firearms to that nation's drug cartels. Since when is Mexico's inability to control its own internal crime problems a recipe for Americans to surrender even more of their Second Amendment rights? Since when do drug cartels purchase fully automatic weapons and hand grenades in the US? This is pure misinformation and propaganda by the Mexican government to give them political cover for their failings. I will not pay for that by giving up my constitutionally protected rights. I am appalled that a sitting United States Attorney General would repeat such misinformation so readily and place the wishes of a foreign government above the Constitution he swore an oath to protect.

I appreciate your consideration and support in this matter.
To Senator Richard Burr (NC-R), Representative Howard Coble (NC-R) and Senator Kay Hagan (NC-D)

Quote:

I am writing to express my concern at the announcement by Attorney General Holder that the Administration will be seeking renewal of the so called "assault" weapons ban. As a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution as recently affirmed by Heller, I encourage you to do all possible to block any legislative efforts aimed at infringing this constitutionally protected right.

As you know, such laws only serve to impact the rights of those who are law-abiding in the first place. Not even the Federal Bureau of Investigation could find any evidence that President Clinton's 1994 AWB did the slightest thing to make Americans safer by reducing crime.

Now we're being told that not only would a new AWB make America safer, it would also help make Mexico safer by supposedly interdicting the supply of firearms to that nation's drug cartels. Since when is Mexico's inability to control its own internal crime problems a recipe for Americans to surrender even more of their Second Amendment rights? Since when do drug cartels purchase fully automatic weapons and hand grenades in the US? This is pure misinformation and propaganda by the Mexican government to give them political cover for their failings. I will not pay for that by giving up my constitutionally protected rights. I am appalled that a sitting United States Attorney General would repeat such misinformation so readily and place the wishes of a foreign government above the Constitution he swore an oath to protect.

I appreciate your consideration and support in this matter.
I cribbed a bit from Mike Irwin (apologies Mike, but it was good) .
__________________
NRA Member
NC Hunter's Education Instructor

PCCA Member (What's PCCA you ask? <- Check the link)
rantingredneck is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:50 PM   #48
USAFNoDak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 21, 2000
Location: Minnesota, Twin Cities
Posts: 1,048
Mike Irwin posted:

Quote:
Quote:
"The Second Amendment," said the attorney general, "is certainly not designed to arm and give fire power to organized crime abroad."

And I don't recall our Constitution being written in a manner conducive to helping a foreign nation control its criminal elements when, in fact, they have never been able to do so.
Then how is the 1st amendment and the 5th Amendment supposed to apply to foreign terrorists we capture, Mr. Holder? I believe AG Holder is guilty of being hypocritical.
__________________
"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams.
USAFNoDak is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:51 PM   #49
Willie D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 24, 2007
Posts: 1,116
Holder seems like a loose cannon.

I'd like to think the Democrats in the House and Senate are aware of how tenuous their lead is and how many of those seats they just won are from areas that won't re-elect someone who bans guns.
Willie D is offline  
Old February 26, 2009, 01:51 PM   #50
Vanya
Staff
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 4,030
Quote:
Does anyone have any examples of public statements made by Dingy Harry regarding assault weapons and the banning of same?
Ya don't need statements. Senator Reid has voted against every iteration of the AWB. See the link here.

He's from Nevada, fergoshsakes.
Vanya is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14021 seconds with 7 queries