Stay safe !
Posted on 07/24/2004 5:12:31 AM PDT by Pharmboy
WASHINGTON, July 23 - During his campaign for the presidency in 2000, George W. Bush took a dramatic step: a vow to support the ban on assault weapons, enacted in 1994 for a 10-year period.
"It makes no sense for assault weapons to be around our society," Mr. Bush declared.
Since then, the president's advisers have repeatedly affirmed his support for the ban, a position that has helped him appeal to moderate voters and demonstrate independence from the powerful gun lobby. But in the middle of a presidential election year, and with only five working days left in Congress before the law expires at midnight on Sept. 13, the issue has become a hot potato that no one in the Bush administration seems eager to touch.
Mr. Bush has said he would sign legislation extending the ban if the Republican-controlled Congress passed it, and White House officials say he stands by that pledge. But Congress has already begun a six-week recess, and Republicans there say they have yet to hear him declare that he actually wants the legislation to move.
All the while, the clock keeps ticking, leaving legislators of both parties predicting that the ban, which for a decade has barred production and sale of 19 kinds of assault weapons, will lapse. The lawmakers do not return to work until Sept. 7, leaving too little time, many feel, for legislation extending the measure to pass both houses of Congress.
Republican and Democratic gun-control advocates have been left badly frustrated. They maintain that Mr. Bush, Republican Congressional leaders and some Democrats have calculated that although the ban has broad popular appeal, it is safer to allow it to expire than to risk alienating conservative-minded gun owners and the National Rifle Association during an election year.
The critics say Mr. Bush is dancing a fine political line, voicing continued support for the ban to appease moderate and swing voters while pleasing his conservative constituency by declining to expend political capital to ensure that the law is extended.
At a news conference on Tuesday, Representatives Michael N. Castle, Republican of Delaware, and Carolyn McCarthy, Democrat of New York, urged Mr. Bush and the Congressional leadership to act. But, standing near the Capitol in front of two tables lined with assault weapons, they acknowledged that they were fighting an uphill battle.
"To allow the ban to sunset is simply irresponsible; every major law enforcement organization in America supports an extension of the ban," said Mr. Castle, who was flanked by law enforcement officials. "But this is a hypersensitive political issue with a lot of members of Congress. The N.R.A. has put a great deal of pressure on them not to do this."
Claire Buchan, a spokeswoman for Mr. Bush, said Tuesday that he had been true to his campaign promise and would like to see the ban retained.
"The president has made his views clear, going back to the 2000 campaign," Ms. Buchan said.
But at a routine press briefing on Monday, Scott McClellan, the president's press secretary, declined to say whether Mr. Bush would prod Congress to extend the measure.
Wayne R. LaPierre Jr., executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said it was already clear that the law was dead. He said it had proved ineffective, doing nothing to reduce crime while infringing on the rights of gun owners.
Mr. LaPierre also said politicians now recognized that supporting the ban was risky. He and others have attributed Al Gore's losses in some states four years ago in part to his strong support for gun control. And he pointed to an interview with the Cleveland daily The Plain Dealer in 1994, the year the ban was enacted, in which President Bill Clinton said 20 House Democrats had lost their seats because of voting for it.
"I think it will expire and not be renewed," Mr. LaPierre said. "It's not only a political loser; the legislation was meaningless in terms of its effect."
Supporters of the law acknowledge that it is riddled with loopholes. But they say the number of assault weapons linked to crimes, as a share of all crime-linked weapons, declined about 66 percent from 1995 to 2002. (In 2002, assault weapons accounted for only about 1 percent of firearms used in crimes, according to one advocacy group, Americans for Gun Safety.)
Supporters also point to a recent poll of 10 electoral battleground states, conducted by the Consumer Federation of America and the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence, that found strong backing in the Midwest and the Southwest for a renewal of the ban.
But Republican pollsters and analysts say voters who are fierce opponents of gun control are more likely to be motivated by the issue.
"On guns, intensity matters," said Q. Whitfield Ayres, a Republican pollster. "That means the people who care about the gun issue care very intensely and are likely to vote on it. The broad public can give you an answer in a survey, but it's unlikely to drive their votes."
Some supporters say Mr. Bush is not alone to blame. They say Democrats including Senator John Kerry, the presumptive presidential nominee, have not been beating the drums loudly enough.
"We have two candidates for president who say they support renewal of the assault weapons ban," said Peter Hamm, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "But neither one of them has been as passionate about it as we would like."
The DemocRat pollsters are telling them the same. The ONLY politicians wringing their hands and spending political capital on it are the ardent anti-gunners in safe seats. A 'Rat in a rural district knows that the fastest way to get booted out in the fall is to vote for ANY gun control.
No. History's greatest agent for freedom: Jesus Christ, and none other in this world compares.
LOL! A practical man indeed...
You are correct, but the law does NOT prohibit the PURCHASE or OWNING of such weapons and magazines that were manufactured or imported BEFORE the "ban" went into effect. In most states you can still buy and sell such "pre-ban" weapons and magazines. If there is a ban on ownership, it was done by your particular state government. Here in Colorado I can still go to a gun store and purchase pre-ban weapons and magazines and own them legally. This probably comes as a shock to people living back east where most assume there is a federal ban on ownership. That is the "big lie" I am referring to.
Best,
PB
Y'all wait and see. Congress is going to call a special session to deal with the 9/11 report, and the AWB will be tacked on to anything that comes out of it.
There are 2 main laws dealing with "military styled" weapons.
There was the 1989 ban on importation of fireams designated by the AG as non-sporting. Then there's the 1994 ban on the manufacture of certain weapons.
The good thing about the 1989 ban is you can still have those guns. Just replace enough parts to make it an American weapon.
It will sunset like I've been saying for months. This New York Slimes' article does nothing but whine. Ha!
It's nothing the Pres. has to worry about because it's not getting nowhere near his desk.
Does the sunsetting of this ban apply to California. Does CA have its own ban?
California already has a stricter ban in place.
Whereby federal law recognizes pre-ban ownership Cali bans any firearm regardless of construction. Also high cap mags are strictly prohibited...unless you're a cop.
This is the reason why Los Angeles is so safe.
That is what I thought. No hope for CA.
Stay safe !
This wasn't even a page one story, and the fact that the Times printed it on the least-read Saturday edition is also telling.
" It's nothing the Pres. has to worry about because it's not getting nowhere near his desk."
Don't be too sure. Complacent gun owners and weak kneed Republicans could allow the ban to be renewed. Fight to the end. Don't make stupid assumptions that will allow the Jackazz party to win another victory.
Feinstein's and Schumer's pet socialist legislation is about to die.
RIP
In lieu of flowers, please send a gift of money to one of your favorite gun shops and buy an extra box of ammo for yourself.
"Y'all wait and see. Congress is going to call a special session to deal with the 9/11 report, and the AWB will be tacked on to anything that comes out of it."
Thats what scares the dawg squeeze out of me. I hate it when congress gets a fire lit under it's arse. Sounds like they are gonna move fast. We have to pay close attention to the AWB as well a NATIONAL ID CARD that is recommended in the 9/11 report.
May I see your papers commrade!!
Beware Freepers
peace....D
Under the picture of the weapon, it says something like "Do you want to see one of these in your neighborhood?"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.