What gun laws do you see Kerry enacting...

[RoeBear]

...in his first term?

Obviously he will re-introduce the AWB; and probably make it tougher.
Does anyone know what tougher would mean? What else do you think he'll propose?

[Bowline]

1. He can introduce all he wants, but can he get it passed?

Not with a Republican controlled Senate and House. Gridlock looms on the horizon.

[OpSomBlood]

2. A lot of it depends on the Congressional election results.

If the Republicans still control the House and Senate, he would probably be wise to sit on gun control until the numbers are more favorable.

I imagine he'll try to get a new AWB in place, one that covers all rifles with detachable magazines. Beyond that, I don't see him really going after handguns because so many people own them.

[FatSlob]

3. He won't introduce any.

Only legislators can do that! All kidding aside, I don't think he would actively campaign for one, as it would alienate tons of folks and perhaps cause a big shift in the midterm elections. If he's smart, he'll remain silent on the issue.

[Bowline]

7. If he introduces ANY anti-gun legislation

I'll do everything in my power to get him booted out of office in 2008.

[CO Liberal]

12. The Gun Lobby Speaks!!!!!

[Bowline]

14. I don't speak for the gun lobby, just for myself. N/T

[CO Liberal]

60. But When So Many Pro-Gunners Spew The Same Lame Arguments Word-for-Word..

...it stands to reason that SOMEONE is telling what to think, and what to day.

[FatSlob]

64. We hear the same thing from you guys.

[library_max]

79. From which of "us guys"

have you EVER heard ANYTHING like, "I'll do everything in my power to get (Kerry) booted out of office in 2008"?

[CO Liberal]

85. No, You Don't

But you hear the same old arguments word-for-word from your side constantly.

[FeebMaster]

88. That's funny.

We hear the same tired crap from the gun grabbers everyday, word for word too. Endless penis references, nuclear weapons strawmen, implications that gun owners or pro-gun people are all Republicans.

[library_max]

95. Read #7, which started this subthread.

"The same thing" refers to Bowline's threat to have John Kerry "booted out of office" if he isn't pro-gun enough.

[FeebMaster]

96. What about it? (nt)

[MrBenchley]

20. Disgraceful, isn't it.....

Remember one out of every three of our "pro gun democrats" admit they're not voting for Kerry....

[OpSomBlood]

22. The way I see it, Kerry has my vote in 2004. He has 4 years to earn it.

Getting Bush out of office is my highest priority right now, and I'm willing to vote for an imperfect Democrat to accomplish that. But in 2008 the situation will be very different, and Kerry will have had to have proven that my doubts about him were wrong.

Let's cross that bridge in 2008, shall we?

[RoeBear]

8. It can certainly be introduced...

...on his behalf.

[FatSlob]

13. I know that...

but a legislator has to do it. I was splitting hairs for fun's sake.

[Union Thug]

4. I don't think we'll see much of anything around guns... /eom

[MichaelHarris]

5. I sure hope he

doesn't go after the large ordinance ban. I have my eye on a used Russian T-22 tank for the upcoming deer season. Those damn deer get pretty big in the north country. Actually I doubt he will introduce much more than renewing the AWB. He is a hunter and avid outdoorsman. I enjoy shooting myself but I have no heart when it comes to killing anything. I mainly shoot old timey muzzle loaders.

[Romulus]

11. old timey ML's

being covered by any .50 cal ban . . . .

[MichaelHarris]

39. but isn't

the 50 cal the bullet of choice for small game such as ground squirrels?

[FatSlob]

41. I hope not!

There wouldn't be much left. .50 cal is a standard muzzle loader size. Heck, revolutionary war muskets used ones that were even bigger.

[MichaelHarris]

45. my muzzle loaders are

50 cal. I've seen 70 cal. I don't hunt at all, I have no heart when it comes to killin anything.

[FatSlob]

47. I don't hunt either.

Excepting groundhogs and moles.

[MichaelHarris]

49. I can't even shoot them

well unless one attacked me in a vicious rage.

[FatSlob]

50. I hate them with a passion.

Groundhogs and moles are the most evil creatures of all time. I kill any and all that I can. They eat my plants, screw up my garden, cause big holes in my yard. Grrrr....I HATE THEM.

[MichaelHarris]

51. but the real question is

how do they taste?

[FatSlob]

57. Ask the raccoons in the woods.

:puke:

[TX-RAT]

62. Whats the preferred weapon, for Moles?

[FatSlob]

65. Pitchfork

I stab the little bastards to death.

[Romulus]

42. no, that would be the .22lr, the "most murderous" round

used to kill the most people in the U.S. . . .

[MichaelHarris]

46. not to mention

trillions of rabbits that wern't hurtin anyone. They were just sittin there, eatin' carrots and stuff, mindin' their own bizness.

[FeebMaster]

54. That's what they want you to think. (nt)

[MichaelHarris]

58. lol

damn those plottin bunnies, damn them to hell

[slackmaster]

6. He'll sign anything that reaches his desk

I doubt that he will introduce any.

[MrBenchley]

9. Closing the gun show loophole, and the assault weapons ban...

with the usual gang of far right wing fuckwits bitterly opposed.

I hope we will see Senate hearings into the irresponsible practices of the gun industry....and I also hope we'll see a ban on .50 caliber guns on the civilian market.

[Bowline]

15. Gotta ban them .50s. Too many crimes being committed by them.

Oh wait, there haven't been any crimes committed by .50 cal rifles. Hmmm.

[TX-RAT]

16. Oh wait, there haven't been any crimes committed by .50 cal rifles

Wrong.
What about Waco?

[Bowline]

17. And what crime was committed at Waco by a .50 cal rifle?

[NorthernSpy]

32. not Waco, but in Colorado this year...

... a .50 cal was used in a crime. Remember Marvin Heemeyer, the guy who built his own tank out of a huge bulldozer and some steel plate? Well, he had a .50 calibre rifle mounted on that thing. He shot some propane cylinders, but they failed to explode. The dozer did all the real damage.

The police wanted to shoot through the armor, but they didn't have quick access to anything sufficiently powerful. Reportedly, they borrowed a .50 cal from private citizen to get the job done.


Mary

[MrBenchley]

19. Shhhh....

That was the holy martyrdom of the gun nuts' messiah....

[Bowline]

24. From the Treasury Dept. report on Waco...NO .50 weapons listed.

See here for a summary of the report. Notice there is no mention of .50 caliber weapons.

[TX-RAT]

26. Did you read the bottom sentence?

[Bowline]

27. Yep, I sure did. Did you?

It referenced ".50 caliber belt links". These are ONLY used in fully-automatic, belt-fed .50 caliber machine guns. These are already covered under the National Firearms Act of 1934 so there is no need to further ban their production or possession. Linked .50 cal ammo is completely and totally useless in a .50, bolt-action or semi-auto rifle. Two completely different weapons who's operating systems are incompatible.

Incidentally, none of the items listed in the last sentence are illegal or banned in any way.

[TX-RAT]

29. Sure did

You can take them out of the links, Duh

[Bowline]

30. Yes, but only the links were found, not the weapons.

Metal links are useless without the gun and the ammo.

[TX-RAT]

48. Funny thing

I just went through my ammo cabinet and noticed, i have rounds for weapons i don't own any more, i have rounds for weapons i do own, but i don't have rounds for weapons I've never owned.

[Bowline]

53. No one said they never owned them...

There were just none confiscated after the raid.

[MrBenchley]

18. Besides the FACT

that we had a fuckwit in GITN earlier this year who set fire to his house so he could perforate firetrucks and amubulances that repsonded....

We're supposed to wait until some shitheel blows a hole in as chemical reactor and causes a mini-Bhopal before we act against this public menace? Ri-i-i-i-i-ght.

[Bowline]

21. One doesn't need a .50 to cause any of the things you mentioned.

And banning something because someone MIGHT do something bad with it is something I'd expect to here from the far right, NOT a supposed progressive liberal like yourself.

[MrBenchley]

23. Too too funny....

"banning something because someone MIGHT do something bad with it is something I'd expect to here from the far right"
That IS hilarious. Tell us about the CPSC...and what right wing fuckwits regularly howl in opposition.

[Bowline]

25. What does the CPSC have to do with .50 cal rifles? N/T

[MrBenchley]

28. Ask me next....

why questions like mine get dodged by RKBA fanatics....

It's because the liberal idea of the Consumer Product Safety Commission saves millions of lives each year by acting to head off menaces to the general public..

And of course the cherry on the top of the sundae is that the exact same bunch of far right wing fuckwits in public life who are opposed to the CPSC (Orrin Hatch, Trent Lott, Tom DeLay, Grover Norquist, David Duke, etc.) turn out to be pretty much the same group of far right wing fuckwits flogging the bogus "gun rights" cause in public life, who also are the last gasp of Jim Crow. You even hear the same diseased rhetoric from idiot cause to idiot cause (the liberal "nanny state"; "elitists" are deciding for you, blah blah blah blah).....

Go figure.

[Bowline]

31. CPSC protects us from defective products.

These guns are not defective. They work exactly as intended.

[MrBenchley]

33. CPSC protects us from dangerous products...

Many of the products the CPSC recalls are not defective...they pose a potential menace to the public safety, just as .50 caliber howitzers and assault weapons do.

And of course, you're not going to say a word about who opposes the existence of the CPSC and seeks to reduce its funding or abolish it...

[NorthernSpy]

34. howitzers come in .50 cal?

Really?

I thought howitzers were artillery. At least, I think I remember RoeBear saying so.


Mary

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

35. It is easy to mistake

a 12.5mm (.50 caliber) projectile for a 105mm (~4.00 inch diameter) projectile. Of course one can be fired from the shoulder and the other one is towed behind a big truck, but to hell with facts.

[MrBenchley]

36. Hey, it is easy to mistake the RKBA for a legitimate cause too....

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

37. Another whopper of a comeback

Far be it for me to say that I do not trust your judgement on what is legitimate or not.

[FatSlob]

38. Does anybody?

[MrBenchley]

43. Lots of those who don't pimp for the Second Amendment Caucus

or know a statement like "blacks, Jews and women are professional victims" is bigoted crap do, fat slob.

[FatSlob]

44. Uh-huh, what are you going to come up with next?

I must commend you. You are the best spokesman for gun-rights that DU has seen in the time I have been here.

[Bowline]

52. Amen brother, amen! n/t

[MrBenchley]

56. High praise indeed (snicker)

[MrBenchley]

55. I'm going to stick with the truth, fat slob...it's alien to the RKBAers

around here....

[FatSlob]

59. Funniest line you've ever written

nah, top twenty though.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

63. Everything about the RKBA cause is dishonest

"If your anger and derision were directed at any minority group besides gun owners (Jews, blacks, fat people, etc.) you'd have been banned from this site a long time ago."
But instead we had a gun owner actually posting bigoted crap about Jews, blacks and women not so very long ago and pretending it had "merit" that needed to be discussed. Strangely enough, not a single "pro gun democrat" objected in the slightest to the open racism in the essay.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=57136

"yet you rarely present facts"
I sure presented a shitload of facts about the CPSC and who opposes it, and what other rancid cause they champion.

"I don't believe you represent the voice of rational, reasonable gun control "
Given what you DO believe, that's not exactly at the top of my list of concerns....

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

67. Surrender, Dorothy....

"It's exactly what the likes of Ashcroft and the Patriot Act supports want."
Funny...it's the gun rights shitheads who made AshKKKroft a cover boy....and our "pro gun democrats" who parrot his diseased dishonest rhetoric here pretty much every day....

[TX-RAT]

68. stand up to your kind and take back their rights

Exactly what rights have you lost?

[MrBenchley]

69. That's a good question....

[TX-RAT]

70. I'm a pro gun Democrat.

In going on 54 yrs, i can't think of one right I've lost. I just don't fall for that,( their taking away our rights crap ).

[FeebMaster]

71. I thought you wanted to see semi-autos banned? (nt)

[TX-RAT]

72. No, I said they could ban them and it wouldn't bother me at all.

I personally don't need semi-autos.

[Bowline]

73. Here we go with this NEED thing again.

Since when did NEEDS have anything to do with RIGHTS?

[TX-RAT]

75. Read again

I said i don't need them.

[FeebMaster]

74. I see.

Would it bother you if they tried to ban something you feel you do need? For example, assuming you own a rifle of some kind, did the attempt to ban "armor piercing" rifle ammunition including .30-30 on Super Tuesday bother you?

[TX-RAT]

76. Would it bother you if they tried to ban something you feel you do need

They never have.

(For example, assuming you own a rifle of some kind, did the attempt to ban "armor piercing" rifle ammunition including .30-30 on Super Tuesday bother you?)
Never needed armor piercing for hunting. I have no idea what 30-30 on Super Tuesday suppose to mean.

[FeebMaster]

77. I'm pretty sure this amendment was discussed at the time.

Although I guess I should call it the attempted amendment. Here's the text:

SA 2619. Mr. KENNEDY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1805, to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others; as follows:

On page 11, after line 19, add the following:

SEC. 5. ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.

(a) EXPANSION OF DEFINITION OF ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.--Section 921(a)(17)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in clause (i), by striking ``or'' at the end;

(2) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:

``(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor; or

``(iv) a projectile for a centerfire rifle, designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability, that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be more likely to penetrate body armor than standard ammunition of the same caliber.''.

(b) DETERMINATION OF THE CAPABILITY OF PROJECTILES TO PENETRATE BODY ARMOR.--Section 926 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``(d)(1) Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Attorney General shall promulgate standards for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor Exemplar.

``(2) The standards promulgated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall take into account, among other factors, variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or centerfire rifle from which the projectile is fired and the amount and kind of powder used to propel the projectile.

``(3) As used in paragraph (1), the term `Body Armor Exemplar' means body armor that the Attorney General determines meets minimum standards for the protection of law enforcement officers.''.


Here's a link to the relevant section of the US Code:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/htm_hl?DB=uscode18&STEMMER=en&URL=/uscode/18/921.html


This should be a link to the congressional record where they are discussing this pages s1636 and s1637:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2004_record&page=S1636&position=all



Read it yourself. I'm sick of typing summaries that no one bothers to read.

On edit: Oh, by the way, would you happen to own a rifle in .30/30?

[TX-RAT]

86. Thanks for the links

Checked them out.
Now, are you going to tell me they plan to outlaw 30-30 ammo. If so how do you come to that conclusion with the links you provided?

Amazingly I've never owned a 30-30. I've always looked at the 30-30 as a very ineffective hunting cartridge. There are far better calibers available.

[FeebMaster]

87. Here's where .30/30 runs into trouble.

Now you'd think this is the new section that would give .30/30 problems:

``(iv) a projectile for a centerfire rifle, designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability, that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be more likely to penetrate body armor than standard ammunition of the same caliber.''.

but that isn't the case. What's the point really of selling AP .30/30 ammo or even marketing .30/30 as ap?? The problem with .30/30 is that it's a pistol round, so it will run afoul of this section:

``(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor;

Now I guess when it comes down to it, it's up to the Attorney General and how he decides to run the armor piercing tests, but if you ask me, things wouldn't look good for .30/30 if that law had passed.


So what calibers do you own? I bet there's a pistol somewhere chambered for some or all of them.

[TX-RAT]

89. So what calibers do you own?

.22
.30
.32
.357
.41
.44
.45
.17
.222
.223
22.250
.243
.270
.284
.300
.338
numerous shot guns
Fair collection of FN an Browning Hi-powers

Armor piercing 30.30 ammo? Why

[FeebMaster]

90. Did you even read my post?

So far as I know there is not .30/30 ammo marketed as armor piercing, but under the law I quoted that fortunately failed to pass it would have likely been classified as armor piercing because it is a pistol round that, when fired out of a rifle at least, will penetrate a bullet proof vest.

Some of those calibers on your list would have been affected by that law. I thought you said they never tried to ban something you thought you needed. Do you not need any of those guns in .357, .41, .44, .45, or .223? Those are just the ones I know of offhand that are chambered in pistols and rifles.

[TX-RAT]

91. Saw the post, no need for sarcasm.

30/30 was a rifle round first.
Sorry but a TC chambered in 30/30 with a 14in barrel doesn't really qualify as a pistol in my opinion, even though it does legally.

(I thought you said they never tried to ban something you thought you needed.)
Don't believe i said it quite that way.

(Do you not need any of those guns in .357, .41, .44, .45, or .223?)
Don't need them, just have them. To be honest most of my hand guns are between 50 and 125 yrs old. The hi-powers are all full Belgium's last made in 83. The others are Colt single actions with a couple of Ruger Super Blackhawks thrown in.

No where did i see it written that if a weapon could penetrate a bullet proof vest, that it would be considered armor piercing.

[FeebMaster]

92. No sarcasm, I was just asking.

"30/30 was a rifle round first.
Sorry but a TC chambered in 30/30 with a 14in barrel doesn't really qualify as a pistol in my opinion, even though it does legally."

It doesn't matter what it was first it matters what it is. Your opinion doesn't matter either. As far as the law is concerned .30/30 is a pistol round.

"Don't believe i said it quite that way."

My mistake. I asked:

Would it bother you if they tried to ban something you feel you do need?

You answered:

"They never have."


"No where did i see it written that if a weapon could penetrate a bullet proof vest, that it would be considered armor piercing."

Maybe you should reread the law.

(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor

``(d)(1) Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Attorney General shall promulgate standards for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor Exemplar.

``(2) The standards promulgated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall take into account, among other factors, variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or centerfire rifle from which the projectile is fired and the amount and kind of powder used to propel the projectile.

``(3) As used in paragraph (1), the term `Body Armor Exemplar' means body armor that the Attorney General determines meets minimum standards for the protection of law enforcement officers.


Now I will admit there is some room for interpretation. Basically it's up to how the attorney general decides to run the tests but think about how that is likely to go. Are they more likely to use a vest rated at III or IV in the test or one rated at IIA? Are they more likely to fire that .30/30 round out of a Thompson Contender with it's 14" barrel or some rifle with a 24" barrel?

The law even mentions this in 926(d)(2): the standards shall take into account variations in performance related to the length of the barrel. Do you think they are going to use the shortest barrel available when they're trying to come up with minimum standards of protection for law enforcement officers?

[TX-RAT]

93. "They never have

Still not sure they have. I didn't see any calibers mentioned, only projectile design.

[FeebMaster]

94. How is projectile design mentioned?

All that is needed for a pistol round is the Attorney General's determination that it will penetrate body armor.

[MrBenchley]

40. Well the feeling is mutual...

"I do not trust your judgement on what is legitimate"
Gee, and yet you take this yobbo's....


Says it all....

[skippythwndrdog]

98. Millions?

This I gotta see evidence of!

[Mr.Green93]

10. 30 cal. bullet ban

[library_max]

78. Not much of any, unless we get strong Democratic majorities in Congress.

Not likely, in Kerry's first term.

There are much higher priorities that he'll have a lot easier time getting passed. He needs to fix the economy and the nation's standing in the world. Once he's done that, the Democrats will be able to point to the Clinton era of peace-and-prosperity and the Kerry era of peace-and-prosperity and nothing in between but the criminal insanity of the Bush years. That'll be a tough message for the Republicans to fight.

Then, four or eight years from now, we'll have solid Democratic majorities. Then will be the time to push truly progressive agendas, like gun control.

[FeebMaster]

80. Best to wait until the second term, right?

Makes sense. I wonder if that's why Bush hasn't passed too much gun control. Reagan waited for his second term to ban civilian machine gun production. Bush 1 waited for his second term before he gave us his Import Ban. Oh wait! That was in his first and only term!

So, basically, you're saying gun control is a losing issue and if Kerry passes some he isn't likely to get a second term. Does that about sum it up?

[library_max]

81. There wouldn't be much chance of passing any with a Republican Congress.

Other than that, I said what I said in my own post, thanks.

[FeebMaster]

82. Yep. Best to wait to the second term

otherwise there won't be a second term, gun control being a losing issue and all.

"There wouldn't be much chance of passing any with a Republican Congress."

That's funny.

[library_max]

83. Pardon me, do you think you just said something?

That's not funny, it's sad.

[FeebMaster]

84. Clearly I said something.

My post contained 25 words plus a quote from you.

What's not funny? What's sad?

[thomas82]

99. whats sad is

Even with a Democrat President, Senate and House the Assault weapon ban only passed by one vote IIRC. Some things will have to change before another ban makes it thru the House and Senate.
Tom

[library_max]

100. "Some things will have to change"

Well, that's what elections are for.

[kisses]

97. See?

None.