Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
letzrockexpress wrote:

I think I feel a wacko right wing conspiracy coming on...

Those of you who honestly believe our guns are going to be taken away by some wacko left wing regime, perpetrated on us by Obama, need to take a chill pill. Let's look at the events of the past few years as they pertain to guns and gun control.

#1) The Brady Bill: This ban on assault weapons was passed in the early 90's and subsequently expired without hardly any fanfare, let alone any real effort to re-instate it in 2004! Assault weapons! ya know? Not hunting rifles or small caliber hand guns! Ak-47s and stuff like that! And they let the ban expire!!

#2) Conceal Carry. I live in Ohio. Conceal carry was passed several years ago with some, but not overwhelming oposition. It now exists in a number of States. If anything, guns are becoming more prevelent.

Not to preach to the choir, but as we know, guns don't kill people, people kill people. I believe intelligent individuals understand that. No one is going to take my guns no matter what legislation is passed. Having said that,for someone to honestly believe that in a four year period, a government, no matter how far left it might be, is going to ban guns and amend the constitution to do so, is not a very sound thinker.
If your candidate didn't win, quit whining about it and start gearing up to encourage voters to see it your way in 2012.



Yea, no one is coming for your weapons, Noo, anyone who thinks that is just nuts.....

This bill has been introduced and with a almost filibuster proof congress, you can bet this is just the start if things to come.

Make sure you look at the list of weapons that they want to ban.

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

H.R.6257

Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008 (Introduced in House)

SEC. 2. RESTRICTION ON MANUFACTURE, TRANSFER, AND POSSESSION OF CERTAIN SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS.


(a) RESTRICTION- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding after subsection (u) the following:
`(v)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.
`(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.
`(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--

`(A) any of the firearms, or replicas or duplicates of the firearms, specified in appendix A to this section, as such firearms were manufactured on October 1, 1993;

`(B) any firearm that--


`(i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;


`(ii) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or


`(iii) is an antique firearm;

`(C) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds of ammunition; or

`(D) any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than 5 rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine.
The fact that a firearm is not listed in appendix A shall not be construed to mean that paragraph (1) applies to such firearm. No firearm exempted by this subsection may be deleted from appendix A so long as this subsection is in effect.


Click the link above for the complete bill
 
Last edited:

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Yea there is nothing to worry about, nooo..........

CNSNews.com - Gun Owners Not Welcome on Obama's White House Team?

Gun Owners Not Welcome on Obama's White House Team?
Friday, November 14, 2008
By Susan Jones, Senior Editor


President-elect Obama at a press conference in Chicago, Friday, Nov. 7, 2008. Standing behind Obama are (L-R) Vice President-elect Biden, Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker and incoming Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)(CNSNews.com) – President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team is showing its hostility toward lawful firearm owners by “weeding out” job applicants who own firearms themselves, a Second Amendment group says.

The Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA) notes that question 59 – part of a 63-item questionnaire given to Obama administration job applicants – asks for information about firearms owned by the applicant and his or her family.

Found in the questionnaire’s “Miscellaneous” section, question 59 reads, “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”

Other questions in the Miscellaneous section ask about the applicant’s postings on Facebook and MySpace Web sites; health and medical status; associations with groups that could be used against the applicant; and any other information that could prove embarrassing to the applicant.

Although it’s not clear that gun ownership would disqualify a job applicant, ISRA says question 59 shows the Obama team’s “distaste” for firearm owners.

"Question 59 provides clear insight into how Obama and his people perceive firearm owners," said ISRA Executive Director Richard Pearson. “The questionnaire poses a number of questions asking the applicant to reveal any unethical activities, or embarrassing Internet chats, then wraps up by asking if anyone in the applicant's family owns a firearm. Obviously, Obama feels that owning a firearm is akin to talking dirty in Internet chat rooms.”

Pearson says the attitude is not surprising, given that Obama – as an Illinois State senator -- voted for SB1195, which included a provision calling for gun owners to be registered in the same manner as sex offenders.

"Once again, we have to ask ourselves just what candidate Obama was talking about when he said he has 'respect' for the 2nd Amendment," said Pearson.

ISRA, which describes itself as an advocate of safe, lawful and responsible firearms ownership, has posted a copy of the questionnaire on its Web site.

The National Rifle Association also noted the anti-Second Amendment implications of the Obama's team's employment questionnaire:

"[A]s this litmus test shows, they have every intention of putting together an administration that is hostile to firearms ownership and to Second Amendment rights," said NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre.

"One of their first official acts is to make a list of gun owners among their own employees. It proves where their hearts are. It shows what their philosophy is. This is more proof that this administration is coming after our freedom and NRA stands ready."
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
The questioning of the questions are relevant based on his history of ill feelings and bad legislation on his part along with his well known desire to do away with guns in the hands of the public.

Is he or those around him entitled toask the questiones? Sure they are, its his staff they are selecting, but as was stated, it shows that this adminstration will put together a staff and adminastration "that is hostile to firearms ownership and to Second Amendment rights."

But hey, thats just mine and few million other gun owners opinion, no big deal.
 
Last edited:

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
The question is the start of the "selection" process. They have people appling for postitons that they don't know so yea, ask the questions and yes the SS WILL know sooner or later (they may or may not know at the time of application. But the simple fact is that it on the face, showing the true side of osama on guns and his desire to add more control and the elimnation of them all together. He WILL sign the UN gun control resolution and he WILL carry his Chicago style gun laws to the rest of the country.

And I really don't care if you believe "what I am cookin", i didn't make up the, Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008, I just posted the bill for the information contained in it. So if you don't believe that, i guess you know better then me and those concerned with this type of control of the people.

Again, this is just the start of things to come.
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
well liberalism is a mental disorder anyhow, so what they think or believemakes no difference to me at all. They will make for a "target rich enviroment" for those that care to take them out when the SHTF!

As for assault weapons having no place in the home, you are right! Their proper place is at the shoulder of one who knows how and is trained to use them in the killing process. That is their only purpose, and the reason i own more then a few. What I kill with them is determined by what i feel is the need at the time........

Oh one other proper use is for practicing to make sure that you don't waste ammo when the time comes!!

and while there were no ak's when the founders wrote the constitution, they understood that technology changes and evolves, yet they didn't set unreasonable limits!
 

letzrockexpress

Veteran Expediter
well liberalism is a mental disorder anyhow, so what they think or believemakes no difference to me at all. They will make for a "target rich enviroment" for those that care to take them out when the SHTF!

As for assault weapons having no place in the home, you are right! Their proper place is at the shoulder of one who knows how and is trained to use them in the killing process. That is their only purpose, and the reason i own more then a few. What I kill with them is determined by what i feel is the need at the time........

Oh one other proper use is for practicing to make sure that you don't waste ammo when the time comes!!

and while there were no ak's when the founders wrote the constitution, they understood that technology changes and evolves, yet they didn't set unreasonable limits!

I think you do care what the liberals say, otherwise you wouldn't be babbling this nonsense. As far as you determining what needs to be killed and when, well, It's that kind of irresponsible dialogue that has given the majority of us responsible gun owners a bad name.
 
Last edited:

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
well liberalism is a mental disorder anyhow, so what they think or believemakes no difference to me at all. They will make for a "target rich enviroment" for those that care to take them out when the SHTF!

That's exactly the sort of comment that the gun control folks like to hear, cause it makes you sound like a crazed lunatic who is just waiting for a 'reason' to begin "taking them out." (Does the mental disorder of liberalism qualify as enough reason for you?)
Please stop "helping" the case for gun ownership - it doesn't need that kind of help.
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Well, first of all we are not talking about assault weapons. No weapon in the original ban was an assault weapon. No weapon in this renewal is an assault weapon. That is a liberals/media term to garner support from those stupid enough to accept it. Citizens are not now authorized to own assault weapons unless they've paid the $3000 tax and passed the intensive background check. Then those very very VERY few citizens can own an assault weapon. What the original and this rerun refer to are "scary looking" semiautomatic guns.

Assault weapons actually do have a place in the home although we're not allowed to have them. The founders intention was for John Citizen to have the right to the same weapons used by the military. No, at that time they didn't have any Stoner or Kalishnikov designs around to refer to but the intention is the same, only the time has changed.

Finally, a responsible gun owner is against any and all new regulations and restrictions. There are far more gun laws on the books already than are needed. What is needed is incredibly swift and horrendously severe punishment of the animate living humans who break the laws, not more laws on inanimate objects.
 
Last edited:

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Ok 1st, OVM, re read it, i said, " they DIDN'T set unreasonable limits", i can see how you would take that to mean they set limits, but it wasn't and isn't my intent to say they did.

2nd, since when is the decision (my decision to make)to defend ones family or self not our decision to make? We all know that the SC has ruled it is not the job of local LE to protect just as individual citizens, so I'll make that decision when it is needed for myself and not relay on anyone to make it for me..

3rd, no cheri, the mental disorder mindset of the liberal isn't reason enough to remove liberals, so don't try t0 inffer that i said anything like that. The liberal mental disorder is enough to allow them to be dismissed as crazy.

Leo, you got it right on all of your post.

As for me feeding the gun control freaks, believe me, i do more in my support of 2A then you'd even imagine, like paying for annual memberships the the 2A foundation for others that are like minded and like paying for NRA memberships for our soldiers so that they can use gun ranges at a discounted rate when they return home from their service. so thats names 2 of many things i do to be involved in 2A protection and support. So my support of gun rights is over and above most people that talk a good line. And beyond that, I'll say any **** thing i want about whoever or whatever i want to, as long as it isn't against the law or a violation of the board rules here.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
As stated above, there are NO legal "assault" weapons sold in the United States. Period. They were outlawed in the 1930's. NO crime has EVER been committed by a LEGAL collector that owns them. Just the facts. They will be using the new ban to outlaw ALL semi-autos, like my everyday shotgun. Next will be all handguns. As to the concealed carry laws, in EVERY state that has put them in crime has gone down. Both my wife and I have CCW's in Michigan. I seldom carry but will start the minute they try to stop me. What a shame that I need permisson to exercise my Constitutional right. Laws passed by crimminals, to control law abiding citizens. What a sick place.I wonder how many of the goobers that pass these laws could pass the back round check to get a gun? I will register nothing, I will give up nothing. Don't even try. I venture to say that millions out there agree with me. Go ahead, call me names, make fun of me, call me old fashioned. I don't really care. I take that oath I took several times, VERY seriously. You know, the one that our new goober in the Presidents office won't. It says something about Defending and protecting the Constitution of the United States from all enemies both forgien and domestic. Old habbits die hard. The 2nd Amendment is not only part of the Constitution but part of the BILL OF RIGHTS!!! The heart of the Constitution. I will not argue with anyone. I said my piece. I will fight this in the courts or in the streets. Whatever it takes. I said we were headed for a civil war. I want to see how many of you in here protect my rights and way of life the way I did yours for 20 years. Yea Right. Fat chance. Has Osama Obama passed his back round check yet? LOL, sure!!!!!!!!! He bought his, the sniviling coward. Layoutshooter
 
Top