Ensuring the "AW" & "Hi-Cap mag". Bans DIE!

7/4/03 | Richard Brengman

[Richard-SIA]

Ensuring the Bans DIE!

Need help listing ALL the rational reasons the bans are unconstitutional or illegal.

I would think that one of the professional RKBA lobby groups would have already done this, but if they have I have not seen the list.

Just a couple I have not seen discussed are;

1. Fails the "reasonable man" test. Even L.E. has a hard time understanding all the details of these bans. Civilians, particularly those who were too young to catch the details when they were enacted, have little chance of complete understanding without a comprehensive course of study. I often find myself trying to explain why certain magazines or accessories are illegal, the reaction I get is disbelief, they either think the law is nuts or I am just trying to cheat them on the price of their gun.

Heated discussions still occur on every forum of RKI's, with several people taking different sides on exactly what each point of the laws mean. This nearly nine years after enactment!

2. Creates "Super citizens". Retired L.E. is treated differently than civilians. Look at the situation with L.E. marked mags, civilians cannot have them, but under some circumstances retired L.E. apparently can keep them. Some L.E. claim the same privilege with "AW's" they bought while still with the department.

Several other points of contention with these alleged "Laws" have occurred to me over time, now I think it is time to start listing them for use in letters to congress.

I know the people here can add to my meager start, so how about it?

[jim_trent]

> As for voting, RKBA supporters are one of the most heavily
> registered and active voting cliqes in the country.

I wish this were true. I began to wonder if it were true about 15-16 years ago when Sarah Brady was jetting into town every other week to try to get some bad anti-gunowner bills passed. She should not have had a chance.

I was among a VERY few other gunowners who spent a lot of time at the legislature trying to talk them out of it. I was VERY disappointed in the lack of support. In fact, I talked to the President of the State Pistol and Rifle Association to find out when he was going to talk to the legislators. He said he wasn't and neither were any of the board members. He said that they were after pistols and since the R&P Assn. was only interested in target shooting, they would not be affected. He felt it was better NOT to get involved.

I talked to a LOT of gunowners in my factory back then. Most of them did not want the gunlaws Sarah was trying to get passed, but their union supported them, so they were keeping their mouth shut. They also voted for gun-grabbers because they were told to. That is where our problem is.

I know that Al Bore lost, but it was by so narrow a margin, ANY GROUP with over 600 members can claim that they elected GW.

I remember reading about a study that was done in California a while back. They cross referenced a mailing list for a gunshow with the state voting registration. There were VERY few registered voters. It has been criticised, but I am worried that it is true.

[Richard-SIA]

Perhaps I should elaborate a little.

Those gun owners who are determined to keep their "AW's" are certainly one of the most vocal, and likely to vote cliqes in the vountry.

I do believe that gun owners as whole are also more likely to register and vote than most other subsets of the American public.
I have challenged attendees at several gun shows to be more active, or to at least vote.
Virtually everyone except those who claim not to believe in our system (votes don't count, all politicians are alike) said they were already registered to vote.
This does not mean that there are nearly as many active voting gun owners as there should be.
This may also only be true in my area, where unions are not so powerful.
It is my sincere hope that the last election weakened the union hold on members voting choices.