In case anyone wonders if a democratic president would try to get a new AWB

G

Garand Illusion

New member
Look about halfway down for the Utube video of the actual debate. They are all very clearly pro AWB.

Except for Edwards (oddly enough), they are also for much more restrictions, though they don't get into it and lament that the "political realities" won't allow for more. Hillary is especially clear on this.

http://www.gunguys.com/?p=2779

It sent a chill up my spine. If one of these morons makes it in, unless I'm unemployed or something I am going to get my AR15. And maybe a Garand if I can swing it -- though I doubt the Garand will make any of their lists.
 
Garand still a fine weapon

I have a Garand (7.62 NATO barreled) that I have alot of 8 rd en bloc clips and ammo for.It is very accurate and fast to reload.

Realistically, on my own without any support, if there is a threat that I cannot handle with the Garand I doubt my 5.56 AR with its 30 rd magazines will help all that much either.
 
In case anyone wonders if a democratic president would try to get a new AWB
Click to expand...

Actually, the democrats have fielded bills on this every year since the AWB terminated, so having a democrat president won't change anything other than the possibility of a ratified bill actually being signed into law.
 
The scary thing to me is that every viable candidate for POTUS woud sign a an AWB: Folks, this is scary. This Republican is totally bent out of shape that my party cannot find a viable pro-gun candidate for president.
 
There are not enough votes in the Congress to pass a new AWB right now, regardless of the president. If you think the Republican candidates are any better you really are not paying much attention. Romney is pro-AWB. McCain doesn't actively support an AWB but would likely barter that away to get other things accomplished.
 
If you think the Republican candidates are any better you really are not paying much attention. Romney is pro-AWB. McCain doesn't actively support an AWB but would likely barter that away to get other things accomplished.
Click to expand...

I believe that possibly Huckabee and Thompson (I know the latter isn't top tier by any means) would not sign one.

But there is still a difference between dems and repubs. While Bush and the new republican candidates would mostly sign a bill, they would not push for one. When the president pushes for something, it's generally worth some votes. At least in his/her party.

And President Bush did give himself an out (I would like to believe, don't know if he would have taken it or not) that he would sign a renewal of the existing AWB. Which as we all know was annoying but not useless.

The dems would be happy to sign the most restrictive AWB possible. And they would push for it and support it.
 
I have a Garand (7.62 NATO barreled) that I have alot of 8 rd en bloc clips and ammo for.It is very accurate and fast to reload.

Realistically, on my own without any support, if there is a threat that I cannot handle with the Garand I doubt my 5.56 AR with its 30 rd magazines will help all that much either.
Click to expand...

I could not agree more!

Although the Garand I eventually get will be .30-06, anything that a Garand properly handled can't deal with is beyond any end of the world scenario I can imagine -- be it Zombies or whatever. I've been saving en bloc clips for awhile.

My AR will be match grade for high power service rifle matches. Not very tactical per se, though a fine weapon for anything that comes up.

And I already have an SKS. I honestly think I can pop in a 10 round stripper clip at least as fast as you can change a mag on an AR. The only problem is if you misalign the stripper clip sometimes the bullets pop off and you have to clear them.
 
There are not enough votes in the Congress to pass a new AWB right now, regardless of the president.
Click to expand...

No, there are not right now, BUT if the people of the US are that dissatisfied with the Republican President that they vote in a Democrat, they will likely be voting in more members of congress in this election and the following one two years later. They may very well have what they need with this election or the next one.
 
That is possible. But I think the average Democrat getting elected these days is less anti-gun (or, dare I say it, more pro-gun) than the average Democrat elected 30 years ago. By this I am referring to newly elected Democrats. I realize the old anti-gun stand-bys are still around, but they comprise less of the Democratic party now than they have in the last 30 years.
 
Even CNN's election center says that Obama is in favor of a national ban on concealed carry for all but retired military and LEOs.

Elitist much?
 
Manedwolf,

and because of this we must all bann together and vote so that Obama doesnt get into office....

I just applied for my CCW permit and dont want him to take it away :mad:

I dont know how you guys who have CCW permits feel on this....but we all must vote!!
 
"There are not enough votes in the Congress to pass a new AWB right now, regardless of the president. If you think the Republican candidates are any better you really are not paying much attention. Romney is pro-AWB. McCain doesn't actively support an AWB but would likely barter that away to get other things accomplished."

Excellent post. The original AWB passed the US House by one vote. Folks have forgotten that 76 Democrats in the US House voted against the original AWB. BTW: 38 Republicans in the House voted for the AWB.
 
Better not wait. If Hilbama becomes president, prices will probably skyrocket right away.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more. Time to through a few stripped receivers in the safe. And other parts I suppose, those prices will probably go up too.
 
Stripped receivers are no good under AWBII. The bill is currently worded to require that the rifle be assembled prior to the date of effect of the bill.
 
Stripped receivers are no good under AWBII. The bill is currently worded to require that the rifle be assembled prior to the date of effect of the bill.
Click to expand...

That would require registration. If you live in a free state now, the government has no idea what you have in terms of assembled and unassembled rifles, only the 4473s from the purchase of lowers.
 
That is true.

So you are saying that you would lie to federal agents about when you built the rifle? Because they are going to ask. If you tell the truth, you are screwed. If you lie, and they find out, you are worse screwed. If you are going that route, you better make sure you pay cash for your upper and destroy the receipts.
 
No, I'm saying that it would require that everyone register the rifles they have, for that law to be in effect.

Oh, yes, and burden of proof on the gun owner to prove when they bought high capacity magazines.

It's pretty much a confiscation-and-punishment ban in so many words.

"I've had these mags ten years!"
"Do you have a receipt?"
"No! I bought them at a show! Ten years ago!"
"You are lying. We say you just bought them. You are under arrest."
 
High capacity magazines? What high cap magazines? All mine are legal single loading magazines. I sold my high capacity mags years ago so I wouldn't be tempted to massacre anyone :)
 
Things like magazines they'll do like they did before -- each will have a stamp on it proclaiming "military and police use" only as well as a possible s/n. Possession of a high cap mag with that marking will be the crime.

I just hope they don't use the same markings as before. I have a couple of those and don't want to have to replace them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top