1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!
  2. We're giving away over $1,000 in prizes this month in the Northwest Firearms Winter Giveaway!
    Dismiss Notice

Do you believe that this AWB will pass? Why?

Discussion in 'General Firearm Discussion' started by mtn1x, Dec 18, 2012.

  1. mtn1x

    mtn1x Portland, OR Member

    Likes Received:
    I'm nervous. I've been dreaming of purchasing a LaRue OBR for quite some time and I never put the money together. I don't think that I'll be able to build the funds in time for the ban IF it were to pass and it bums me out. That being said...

    *points to title*
  2. MountainBear

    MountainBear Sweet Home, OR Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    Voted no. Wishful thinking maybe?

    Hoping enough Republicans will stand up and say this is not the solution to our problems. Hoping but not necessarily hopeful.
    Wildcat and (deleted member) like this.
  3. deadeye

    deadeye Albany,OR. Moderator Staff Member

    Likes Received:
    There isnt one yet. I only see the one that Diane has been working on mentioned and I believe that that will get some heavy revisions put to it.
    It really depends on the time between now and then (actual introduced item) and what new subjects come up to distract everyone.
  4. chris61182

    chris61182 A little west of Portland Active Member

    Likes Received:
    I voted no, simply because we can't afford to think differently. Time to start writing our reps, both state and federal.
    mtn1x and (deleted member) like this.
  5. mtn1x

    mtn1x Portland, OR Member

    Likes Received:
    We are definitely outnumbered. Doesn't mean I won't stop fighting. That's what Patriots do.
  6. rdt

    rdt SW Portland Active Member

    Likes Received:
    NO - If there are a few more years of economic stability on the horizon, the industry is way too much of a cash cow.

    Also, implementation would be difficult and unpopular to the point of becoming a boondoggle.

    To say nothing of how transparently pointless such a ban would be unless they successfully found & confiscated all the newly-banned materiel built & sold over the last 8 years. To me, a new AWB without a grandfather clause seems even more far fetched than an AWB.

    BUT - if the S is going to HTF in the next 6-9 months the "cash cow" point becomes moot. In that light I could see an AWB or more getting pushed through as part of a last minute power grab to secure strategic resources.
    Or it could be used to trigger the SHTF.
    Or we could even see an astroturfed militant reaction "in preemptive defense of the 2A" in order to declare martial law and trigger the SHTF (false flag style).
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2012
  7. badclam

    badclam willapa bay Sunny SW WA Active Member

    Likes Received:
    I voted yes but hope I'm wrong. I've seen these kinds of things come and go and it feels different to me this time. I don't know if it's because of the increased media, the fact that Obama got re-elected or what, but everybody is talking guns now.I've never seen so many people that have nothing to do with guns have such strong opinions. I've never seen so many high profile businesses take anti gun stances. Even at half time on football for Christ sake. We have a tough fight on our hands if we are to keep the status quo.
  8. Hook686

    Hook686 Northern California Active Member

    Likes Received:
    It strikes me as a very simple solution to a very complex and frightening problem. If people think it will make them safer it will sell.
  9. Stewage

    Stewage Saint Helens, OR New Member

    Likes Received:
    I voted yes, not that I want an AWB, I just that I feel the shear number of people out there don't quite get what the main problem is. I think the ban will be very similar, if not exactly, like the Clinton one (Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994). The main difference is the new one, I fear, will not be temporary.
  10. I-Shoot

    I-Shoot Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Likes Received:
    I think that if it goes through, it would have to be very quickly while the emotions are still running high. If some other huge issue comes along and the media gets distracted, then it could get lost in discussions and bargaining without ever getting passed.

    The worst case scenario is that there is a copy-cat crime in the near future, which would obviously be tragic for the victims, but would also cause such an uproar that something would have to get pushed through. Based on what psychologists are saying, shooters want fame, and now the bar has been raised. Shopping malls, churches, the work place, that will get you some media coverage, but kill children and you'll be on the news internationally for weeks. Twisted motivation for the severely mentally ill.
    Nwcid and (deleted member) like this.
  11. Doc In UPlace

    Doc In UPlace Tacoma-ish Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    These media people have gon absolutely banannas. If a person is only watching Fox they are missing the **** storm, at CNN and MSNBC, it is the riot act, hour after hour.
    I've never seen anything like it. It looks like the momentum just might be great enough to push the President into taking action -in spite of his own genuine reluctance.
    This is an issue that has little to do with thought, it's completely a knee-jerk emotional resonse to do anything for the sake of doing something. That's what makes it so serious.
  12. CharonPDX

    CharonPDX Portland, OR Active Member

    Likes Received:
    I think *SOMETHING* will pass. As others have said, it's not that I want it to, but I bet it will.

    I don't think it will be the same as the last one. If anything, I think it is likely to be "better written" (where "better" means "fewer loopholes", not "I think it is a better law,") than the last one. Likely to not ban silly things like flash hiders and collapsable stocks, but be written to ban weapons capable of accepting >10 round magazines.

    Personally (don't string me up,) I'm willing to give up truly *LARGE* capacity magazines if we can trade that for a more rational "ban". Say 30 rounds for long guns, 20 (I'd grudgingly go down to 15,) for handguns. Make that the maximum. But don't try to ban weapon "features" that have nothing to do with how they work as a firearm.

    And pass comprehensive background check reform (instant federal background checks, hell, I'd even allow Oregon-style "background checks at all gun shows" if the background checks are instant and free,) that includes actually finding things that should ALREADY get someone disqualified from owning a firearm.

    I figure if we give a few things, we should be able to convince the gun-friendly Democrats to *NOT* go along with a wholesale ban. (Schrader, DeFazio, etc.) Then again, I also think we need to reform healthcare to provide mental health care to everyone. If we detect the "crazies" and treat them, maybe we can avoid "NEEDING" gun control. If you compare US violence rates per 100,000, we're not a massive outlier. It's just murders in particular that we are. We aren't even massively outside the norm for "mass shootings!" Yeah, the UK with their strict gun laws doesn't have nearly as many, but they *DO* have them (even after banning all semi-auto rifles and all handguns,) and when you normalize for population, it's not too far off. We need to fix our "culture" (mental health care, poverty,) if we want to seriously do something about "gun crime" (or crime of any kind, for that matter.)

    So, back to the question: While I hope we don't (I prefer more liberal gun laws than tighter ones,) I do expect that SOMETHING will be passed. Magazine capacity nearly guaranteed, although I think we can negotiate away from 10 being the hard cap; and unfortunately, likely, some form of rifle ban that is more than last time.
  13. DSAPT9

    DSAPT9 North Idaho Gold Supporter Gold Supporter

    Likes Received:
    You know what I am getting sick and tired of giving in to these thugs in the white house. I have committed no crime yet I have to be punished for the actions of others.

    First how would a background have helped in the school shooting or the one in the Oregon mall? All the firearms where stolen in fact the school shooter killed his mom to get them.

    So because of this I have to pay the price of more harassment to own something I already have and went through a background check to get in the first place.

    Yes I feel we are going to have a new AWB and probably a heavy tax on ammo as well to the point we can not afford to buy it. That way they do not stop you from owning firearms you just can’t afford to buy ammo to use them.

    I am sad to say this country is going down hill fast and we elected most of the folks driving it into the ground.

    Wildcat, Redcap, aksu747 and 3 others like this.
  14. nwdrifter

    nwdrifter troutdale oregon Active Member

    Likes Received:
    3 days ago i would say no way with the rep holding the house, today i say 99% yes. watching the news today i have seen long time 2nd amendment republicans saying they have changed their minds and will now push for a yes and stand side by side with frankenstein.

    I also think the rep's and the NRA are scared of what might be pushed and will be willing to trade a lighter Brady bill instead of the heavy bans and regulations some are pushing and looking like evil people by fighting.

    Think about it if this gets pushed now and the Rep and NRA say hell no on anything their will be hell to pay in 2 years and we will get an all Dem government again and huge law changes.

    I dont see a long drawn out debate on a new bill either. I see a new vote on the old Brady bill implementing the old bill almost word for word except maybe closing the so called gun show loop hole. I could be wrong but never am. ;)
  15. Russianfist

    Russianfist Sweet home, Oregon Active Member

    Likes Received:
    I voted NO.

    I think the Gov. Has its work cut out for them and in theory the argument could tied up for the rest of the presidency. We will know more in the spring when they have something drawn up. In the mean time the states need to be watched closely because they will act swiftly on this.
  16. MrNiceGuy

    MrNiceGuy between springfield and shelbyville Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    I have all of my fingers crossed that common sense will override these arbitrary knee-jerk reactions.
    Having said that, my hopes are not high.

    The panic has already started. I was going to buy a few 25rnd 10/22 mags for christmas presents but they're either $40 or sold out everywhere i've gone.
    I guess my father is going to have to deal with the usual gift of ammo, magazine subscriptions, and a new iphone.
  17. oneharmonic

    oneharmonic Portland, OR Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    At the national level, it should be difficult. I don't see 33 House Republicans rolling over very easily on this issue.

    But at the state level, it's much more likely to happen. In Oregon we have a 16/14 Dem/Rep split in the Senate, but an even 30/30 split in the House. State level bans can also be instituted through voter measures, but that would have to wait until the next election cycle.
  18. torrshi

    torrshi Mill Creek WA New Member

    Likes Received:
    If we are supposed to become the zombie slaves they have been wanting, than there is no reason to keep us carrying weapons. We will all loose our rights at some point the way this is going. They sure are not training brain surgeons on TV but killers and murderers. Resistance is futile. Only thing left is to leave. Look how long it took to ruin the family structure. 30-40 years. They have been trying to disarm the nation since the 30s. Looks like people like their guns more than their wives but they are loosing just like the family.
  19. Hawaiian

    Hawaiian Tigard Oregon Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    Hopefully some time will pass and emotions will calm down before a ban come up for a vote. Hopefully someone will require a study to evaluate if a ban would actually make a difference. It is currently a knee jerk reaction with no real thought process. Do they really believe that limiting mags to 10 rounds will make much of a difference? They need to do a reality check.
  20. TheHumungus

    TheHumungus Portland Active Member

    Likes Received:
    Very sad to see the days of AR-15 hoarding and dealer price gouging have returned. I voted no because I think, in the end, logical and cooler heads on the Republican side will prevail. The last major gun legislation passed by the house was I think in 2004 was to protect gun gun manufacturers from liability, and I believe it died in the Senate. So far, the only people ranting about an AWB are media socialists and Liberal Fascists. The only way for a new AWB to pass is if Republicans in the house get on board. I got nervous yesterday when I saw John Boehner made a statement about having a "discussion" about guns. I don't trust him and think he is an awful leader for the Republicans. Part of the reason I switched my registration to Tea Party. However, I think most rank and file Republicans will not support any new AWB in the house. However, should Republicans lose the house in 2014, then it's game over for gun owners. It will also depend on what the NRA says at their press conference on Friday, and what they propose over the coming weeks. They have remained silent since the shooting. Regardless of what happens, the coming months and years will be very difficult for gun owners, and we may very well see our gun rights further eroded. I hate to say it, but our nation is irreversibly headed down the socialist rabbit hole. Half the nation wants free stuff from the government, and could not give a rats *** about freedoms guaranteed by our constitution, as long as it doesn't directly affect them. It will be a long, slow decline, but I doubt we will see good times again in our nation while we are alive. Rome fell in 700 years, not because it was conquered, but because it rotted from within. We are rotting faster than that.
    jerman1964 and (deleted member) like this.