25 years ago today, the Clinton AWB was enacted. 15 years ago it expired.

If it doesn't fit in any of the other forums, post it here!
Miami_JBT
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:17 pm

25 years ago today, the Clinton AWB was enacted. 15 years ago it expired.

Post by Miami_JBT » Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:56 pm

Image

For all you folks under the age of 30, let me explain to you a little bit of history.

September 13, 1994 is a date which will live in gun rights infamy. That was the date that President Clinton got out his pen, scribbled his name, and made things a wreck for law-abiding gun owners with the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, a subsection of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 law that was created at the behest of the Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex.

[youtube]GKW_YwFL8_c[/youtube]

Police statistics prior to the passage of the ban didn't lie in how useless the AWB would become and that the weapons targeted by the ban were hardly every used by criminals.

Image

Image

But that didn't stop them and pass it they did.

[youtube]vUZ5agBo-Zw[/youtube]

It was a dark time for gun owners across the country. What was suddenly legal to manufacturer and sell one day was made illegal the next. Guns likes these were suddenly high sought after and valuable because they could take flash hiders, pistol grips, detachable 10+ round mags, folding stocks, and of course bayonets.

Image

Image

Original ad from Centerfire Systems when the AWB was being passed in 1994.

But with the wicked mark of Bill Clinton, the end result were neutered guns and gimped magazines like this.

Image

A Post Ban Legal Bushmaster with a fixed stock, 10rd magazine, no bayonet lug, and a non threaded barrel.

Yup, magazines over 10 rounds were banned and a number of guns were too either by name or through a features test. The Clinton Administration crowed about it's passage like it was the second coming of Jesus.

[youtube]73cDO1eiJiQ[/youtube]

They used it as a campaign tool for the 1996 Presidential Elections.

[youtube]Eo-giTWJq9s[/youtube]

But the industry wasn't stupid and figure out ways to nullify the ban as best they can. Here, we have a 60 Minutes news report originally aired in 1999, talking exactly about what the ban did and how companies went around it.

[youtube]8s8RO2e0Ecc[/youtube]

Image

Original Bushmaster ad showing a Post Ban Legal AR-15.

Image

Period Rock River Arms Ad showing a Post Ban Configured Rifle and a LE/Gov.Mil only Sale Rifle.

Boy did the prices on certain things sky rocket though, GLOCK magazines were especially hit hard.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Magazine ad during the AWB.

Since pistols were affected too. Companies suddenly decided that if they were limited to ten rounds; they'd shrink their guns and make them far more concealable. And that utterly scared the gun grabbers like the Chicago Tribune in their July 18, 2000 article titled Guns Foes Warn of 'Pocket Rockets'.

The gun fits in the palm of your hand. It packs three times the power of its predecessors. It holds up to 10 bullets. It is what police call a "pocket rocket."

The issue snagged the attention of U.S. Rep. Rod Blagojevich (D-Ill.), a champion of anti-gun legislation who on Monday said he would introduce a bill to ban the weapons. "These are new high-tech guns designed specifically for killing people," he said during a news conference at the Dirksen Federal Building. "They have no real sport purpose, and they don't do anything that enhances a gun collector's collection."

The weapons started gaining popularity in 1994, and today, virtually all major gun manufacturers produce them, said Tom Diaz, senior policy analyst at the center. Diaz also said the industry has promoted "pocket rockets"--a term coined by Austrian gun manufacturer Glock to market a small, high-powered pistol--in tandem with a wave of state laws that permit licensed people to carry concealed weapons.


Yup, guns like the GLOCK 26 were born because of the restrictions placed on the industry by the Clinton AWB. If someone was limited to 10rds of 9mm, why would they buy a G17 and have all that wasted space? Instead, a gun the size of a Walther PPK or S&W J-Frame but chambered in 9mm or .40 S&W came on the scene and is scared the bejeezus out of the gun grabbers. But the industry and more importantly, the law abiding public loved it.

Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation based in Bellevue, Wash., maintains that the guns fill an important niche.

"They serve a very important purpose for people's self-defense, especially for women who want to put it in their purse," said Gottlieb, who said about 22,000 of the organization's members or contributors come from Illinois. "There's no such thing as a good or bad gun. It depends on whose hand it's in."


Luckily for gun owners; a 10 year sunset provision was inserted into the bill and through an act of God. The 2000 and 2002 elections were mostly positive. George W. Bush beat Al Gore, was elected as President, and the Republican Party (then somewhat pro-gun) maintained a majority in Congress even though President Bush said he'd sign it if it reached his desk.

[youtube]A7M3rLWLoVY[/youtube]

When the sunset clause came up, it never was voted upon to extend or be made permanent. And far more importantly, it never reached President Bush's desk.

On September 13, 2004; ten years afters after it was enacted, it expired. It was like a veil was lifted off the bird cage and the warmth of the sun came pouring in.

Image

ATF's website on 9/13/2004.

The market shuddered in excitement, things became normal once again. And oh my how did certain companies, pro gun organizations, and gun banners react. The industry reacted of course by being able to sell what was what was once verboten to the common plebeians. Magazines, flash hiders, and telescopic stocks were suddenly falling like manna from heaven as wallets broke sound barriers.

Image

Bushmaster's website on 9/13/2004.

Image

Olympic Arms' announcement on 9/13/2004.

Image

Aramlite's website on 9/13/2004.

Websites like AR15.com went nuts with the expiration of the ban.

Image

AR15.com when the AWB expired.

Image

AR15.com on 9/13/2004.

Pro Gun Organizations like the NRA and GOA were celebrating.

Image

NRA's website on 9/13/2004.

Image

GOA's website on 9/13/2004. CLICK HERE for the full size legible image.

The Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex was less than thrilled.

Image

Violence Policy Center's website on 9/13/2004. CLICK HERE for the full size legible image.

Image

Brady Campaign's website on 9/13/2004. CLICK HERE for the full size legible image.

As we know, the AWB was worthless in preventing crime and in reality only affected the law abiding. Even the gun grabbers admitted that after the ban ended.

New York Times‘ Lois Beckett.

But in the 10 years since the previous ban lapsed, even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.

It turns out that big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do.


On a personal level, to this day, my tastes and purchasing habits in firearms have been shaped by the AWB. I see folks spend a ton of cash on fancy muzzle brakes when to me, a standard ten dollar A2 flash hider is where it is at. Bayonet lugs, folding/collapsing stocks, and mags over 10rds are important to me and that is what guides my tastes even in the era of slick full length free float handguards and space age muzzle brakes.

Though the fight is far from over and the assaults on our rights continue. Both sides have learned lessons and taken them to heart as a result of those dark ten years. The Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex learned that grandfathering and a features test would not pay off and are now going outright banning. The Gun Rights side learned to buy it cheap and stack it deep along with the fact that we cannot sit on our laurels and that the fight is never ending.

So learn from our past and prepare for the future.

ab4ka
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 6:06 pm
Location: Lakeland, FL

Post by ab4ka » Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:32 pm

Great post! The only downside is now you've got me jonesing for an SKS. Bastard! ;)

User avatar
SteyrAUG
Posts: 218
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:17 am

Post by SteyrAUG » Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:13 am

We should also be mindful that before the sunset, a Republican majority Congress successfully added the reauthorization of the Clinton ban to a Larry Craig industry protection bill that IF passed would have meant nobody would have a Colt 6920. And George Bush (43) had previously stated that if such a bill found it's way to his desk he would have signed it.

Thankfully Larry Craig at that point killed his own bill rather than see it go forward with that amendment. So everyone with a post sunset rifle owed a debt of thanks to a former senator who used to troll airport bathrooms looking for hookups.

Miami_JBT
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:17 pm

Post by Miami_JBT » Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:47 pm

Here is the PDF of the final engrossed bill that was HR 3355.

Additionally, the fight between Republicans and Democrats was a dog and pony show. The bill was introduced in the House and there was only a Voice Vote so no official record was kept.

From there, it went to the Senate and they had a recorded vote for it before it was sent back to the House for revision again. The first recorded vote for the AWB in the Senate had a 95% Yea vote for the bill (which had the AWB in it). You can read the bill as it was when it passed the Senate the first go around by clicking here.

Image

It clearly has the AWB in it and in the bill it is listed under the following:
TITLE XLV--SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS

SEC. 4501. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the 'Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act'.

SEC. 4502. 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 at the end the following new subsection:
'(s) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.'.
(b) DEFINITION OF SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPON- Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
'(29) The term 'semiautomatic assault weapon' means--
'(A) any of the firearms, or types, replicas, or duplicates in any caliber of the firearms, known as--
'(i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);
'(ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;
'(iii) Beretta AR-70 (SC-70);
'(iv) Colt AR-15;
'(v) Fabrique Nationale FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;
'(vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;
'(vii) Steyr AUG;
'(viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and
'(ix) any shotgun which contains its ammunition in a revolving cylinder, such as (but not limited to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;
'(B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of--
'(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
'(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
'(iii) a bayonet mount;
'(iv) a flash suppressor or barrel having a threaded muzzle; and
'(v) a grenade launcher;
'(C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of--
'(i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
'(ii) a barrel having a threaded muzzle;
'(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned;
'(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and
'(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and
'(D) a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least 2 of--
'(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
'(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
'(iii) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and
'(iv) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.
(c) PENALTIES-
(1) VIOLATION OF SECTION 922(s)- Section 924(a)(1)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking 'or (q) of section 922' and inserting '(q), or (s) of section 922'.
(2) USE OR POSSESSION DURING CRIME OF VIOLENCE OR DRUG TRAFFICKING CRIME- Section 924(c)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended in the first sentence by inserting ', or semiautomatic assault weapon' after 'short-barreled shotgun,'.
(d) IDENTIFICATION MARKINGS FOR SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS- Section 923(i) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new sentence: 'The serial number of any semiautomatic assault weapon manufactured after the date of enactment of this section shall clearly show the date on which the weapon was manufactured.'.

SEC. 4503. EXEMPTION FOR FIREARMS LAWFULLY POSSESSED PRIOR TO DATE OF ENACTMENT.
Section 922(s) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 4502(a), is amended by adding at the end the following paragraph:
'(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the transfer or possession of any firearm that was lawfully possessed before the effective date of this subsection.'.

SEC. 4504. EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN HUNTING AND SPORTING FIREARMS.
Section 922 of title 18, as amended by section 4503, is amended by adding at the end the following paragraph:
'(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) is an unserviceable firearm; 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.'.

SEC. 4505. EXEMPTIONS FOR GOVERNMENTAL AND EXPERIMENTAL USE.
Section 922(s) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 4504, is amended by adding the following paragraph:
'(4) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
'(A) the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State; or
'(B) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of any firearm by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary, or for exportation.'.

SEC. 4506. RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS AND RELATED RESTRICTIONS.
(a) OFFENSE- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 4505, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
'(t)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to sell, ship, or deliver an assault weapon to a person who does not fill out a form 4473 in connection with the purchase of the assault weapon.
'(2) It shall be unlawful for a person to purchase, possess, or accept delivery of an assault weapon unless the person has filled out a form 4473 in connection with the purchase of the assault weapon.
'(3) If a person purchases an assault weapon from anyone other than a licensed dealer, both the purchaser and the seller shall maintain a record of the sale on the seller's original copy of form 4473.
'(4) An owner of an assault weapon on the effective date of this subsection who requires retention of form 4473 under this subsection shall, within 90 days after publication of regulations by the Secretary under paragraph (5), request a copy of form 4473 from a licensed dealer in accordance with those regulations.
'(5) The Secretary shall, within 90 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, prescribe regulations for the request and delivery of form 4473 under paragraph (4).'.
(b) PENALTY- Section 924 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
'(i) A person who knowingly violates section 922(t) shall be fined not more than $1,000 (in accordance with section 3571(e)), imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both.'.
(c) DISABILITY- Section 922(g)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting 'or a violation of section 922(t)' before the semicolon at the end.

SEC. 4507. BAN OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.
(a) PROHIBITION- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 4506, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
'(u)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
'(2) This subsection does not apply to--
'(A) a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency of the United States or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State;
'(B) the lawful transfer or lawful possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device that was lawfully possessed before the effective date of this subsection; or
'(C) the transfer or possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary.'.
(b) DEFINITION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE- Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 4502(b), is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
'(30) The term 'large capacity ammunition feeding device'--
'(A) means--
'(i) a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; and
'(ii) any combination of parts from which a device described in clause (i) can be assembled; but
'(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.'.
(c) LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES TREATED AS FIREARMS- Section 921(a)(3) of title 18, United States Code, is amended in the first sentence--
(1) by striking 'or (D) any destructive device.'; and
(2) by inserting '(D) any destructive device; or (E) any large capacity ammunition feeding device.'.
(d) PENALTY- Section 924(a)(1)(B) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 4502(c), is amended by striking 'or (s)' and inserting '(s), or (u)'.
(e) IDENTIFICATION MARKINGS FOR LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES- Section 923(i) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 4502(d), is amended by adding at the end the following new sentence: 'A large capacity ammunition feeding device manufactured after the date of enactment of this sentence shall be identified by a serial number that clearly shows that the device was manufactured or imported after the effective date of this subsection, and such other identification as the Secretary may by regulation prescribe.'.

SEC. 4508. STUDY BY ATTORNEY GENERAL.
(a) STUDY- The Attorney General shall investigate and study the effect of this title and the amendments made by this title, and in particular shall determine their impact, if any, on violent and drug trafficking crime. The study shall be conducted over a period of 18 months, commencing 78 months after the date of enactment of this Act.
(b) REPORT- Not later than 8 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall prepare and submit to Congress a report setting forth in detail the findings and determinations made in the study under subsection (a).

SEC. 4509. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This title and the amendments made by this title--
(1) shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act; and
(2) are repealed effective as of the date that is 10 years after that date.
SEC. 4510. APPENDIX A TO SECTION 922 OF TITLE 18.
Section 922 of title 18, United States code, is amended by adding at the end the following appendix:
'APPENDIX A
Centerfire Rifles--Autoloaders
Centerfire Rifles--Lever & Slide
Centerfire Rifles--Bolt Action
Centerfire Rifles--Single Shot
Drillings, Combination Guns, Double Rifles
Rimfire Rifles--Autoloaders
Rimfire Rifles--Lever & Slide Action
Rimfire Rifles--Bolt Actions & Single Shots
Competition Rifles--Centerfire & Rimfire
Shotguns--Autoloaders
Shotguns--Slide Actions
Shotguns--Over/Unders
Shotguns--Side by Sides
Shotguns--Bolt Actions & Single Shots

TITLE XLVI--RECREATIONAL HUNTING SAFETY

SEC. 4601. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the 'Recreational Hunting Safety and Preservation Act of 1993'.

SEC. 4602. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) recreational hunting, when carried out pursuant to law (as implemented by the regulations of Federal and State wildlife management agencies) is a necessary and beneficial element in the proper conservation and management of healthy, abundant, and biologically diverse wildlife resources;
(2) recreational hunters (because of a generally demonstrated concern with the conservation of wildlife resources and preservation of habitat necessary for the breeding and maintenance of healthy wildlife populations, and through a familiarity with the resources gained from experience in the field) are a valuable asset in ensuring enlightened public input into decisions regarding management and maintenance programs for wildlife resources and habitat;
(3)(A) recreational hunting supports industries highly significant to the national economy through sales in interstate commerce of sporting goods; and
(B) the Federal excise taxes imposed on the sales provide a major source of funding for vital programs of wildlife conservation and management;
(4) various persons are engaging in (and have announced an intent to continue to engage in) a variety of disruptive activities with the premeditated purpose of preventing and interfering with the conduct of lawful recreational hunting on Federal lands, which activities--
(A) place both recreational hunters and the disruptive persons in imminent jeopardy of grave physical injury or death;
(B) disrupt the peaceful, lawful, and prudent conduct of wildlife population and habitat management programs by Federal and State wildlife management agencies; and
(C) ultimately may alter the planned program objectives, resulting in--
(i) undesirable patterns of activity within populations of wildlife;
(ii) the endangerment of the future viability of wildlife species; and
(iii) damage to habitat values;
(5) Federal lands comprise important wildlife habitat resources that--
(A) support many large, diverse, and vital populations of wildlife; and
(B) offer significant opportunities for legal recreational hunting as an important management tool to ensure the future viability of the wildlife populations;
(6) it is the right of citizens of the United States freely to enjoy lawful recreational hunting on Federal lands in accordance with regulations promulgated by Federal and State wildlife management agencies; and
(7) in many instances under current law, vagueness and ambiguity exist regarding the application of State laws and enforcement activities relating to--
(A) the safety of hunters; and
(B) the legal rights of recreational hunters to participate peacefully in lawful hunts on Federal lands.

SEC. 4603. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this title:
(1) FEDERAL LANDS- The term 'Federal lands' means--
(A) national forests;
(B) public lands;
(C) national parks; and
(D) wildlife refuges.
(2) LAWFUL HUNT- The term 'lawful hunt' means an occasion when an individual is engaged in the taking or harvesting (or attempted taking or harvesting) through a legal means and during a specified legal season of a wildlife or fish, on Federal lands, which activity--
(A)(i) is authorized by or licensed under the law of the State in which it takes place; or
(ii) is regulated by game or fishing seasons established by the State in which it takes place;
(B) is not prohibited by a law of the United States; and
(C) does not infringe upon a right of an owner of private property.
(3) NATIONAL FOREST- The term 'national forest' means lands included in the National Forest System (as defined in section 11(a) of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1609(a))).
(4) NATIONAL PARK- The term 'national park' means lands and waters included in the national park system (as defined in section 2(a) of the Act entitled 'An Act to facilitate the management of the National Park System and miscellaneous areas administered in connection with that system, and for other purposes', approved August 8, 1953 (16 U.S.C. 1c(a))).
(5) PUBLIC LANDS- The term 'public lands' has the same meaning as is provided in section 103(e) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702(e)).
(6) SECRETARY- The term 'Secretary' means--
(A) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to national forests; and
(B) the Secretary of the Interior with respect to--
(i) public lands;
(ii) national parks; and
(iii) wildlife refuges.
(7) WILDLIFE REFUGE- The term 'wildlife refuge' means lands and waters included in the National Wildlife Refuge System (as established by section 4 of the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd)).

SEC. 4604. OBSTRUCTION OF A LAWFUL HUNT.
(a) VIOLATION- It is unlawful for a person knowingly and with the intent of obstructing, impeding, or interfering with a lawful hunt by an individual to--
(1) obstruct, impede, or otherwise interfere with a lawful hunt by an individual;
(2) engage in activities that prevent or impede the reasonable and usual means of access by those individuals who intend to participate in a lawful hunt, whether the activities occur on Federal lands or upon a public or private road, highway, path, trail, or other normal route of access to Federal lands;
(3) take or abuse property, equipment, or hunting dogs being used in conjunction with a lawful hunt; or
(4) enter onto Federal lands or travel in interstate commerce to further--
(A) a scheme or effort to obstruct, impede, or otherwise interfere with a lawful hunt; or
(B) the efforts of another person to obstruct, impede, or interfere with a lawful hunt.
(b) MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS- The Secretary may consider participation by a person in more than one of the activities described in this section to constitute multiple violations.

SEC. 4605. CIVIL PENALTIES.
(a) IN GENERAL- A person who engages in an activity described in section 4604 shall be assessed a civil penalty of not less than $500, and not more than $5,000, for each violation.
(b) VIOLATION INVOLVING FORCE OR VIOLENCE- Upon a determination by a court that the activity involved the use of force or violence, or the threatened use of force or violence, against the person or property of another person, a person who engages in an activity described in section 4604 shall be assessed a civil penalty of not less than $1,000, and not more than $10,000, for each violation.
(c) RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PENALTIES- The penalties established by this section shall be in addition to other criminal or civil penalties that may be levied against the person as a result of an activity in violation of section 4604.
(d) PROCEDURE-
(1) COMPLAINTS FROM GOVERNMENT AGENTS- Upon receipt of a written complaint from an officer, employee, or agent of the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, or other Federal agency that a person violated section 4604, the Secretary shall--
(A) forward the complaint to the United States Attorney for the Federal judicial district in which the violation is alleged to have occurred; and
(B) request the Attorney General of the United States to institute a civil action for the imposition and collection of the civil penalty specified in subsection (a) or (b).
(2) COMPLAINTS FROM INDIVIDUALS- Upon receipt of a sworn affidavit from an individual and a determination by the Secretary that the statement contains sufficient factual data to create a reasonable belief that a violation of section 4604 has occurred, the Secretary shall--
(A) forward a complaint to the United States Attorney for the Federal judicial district in which the violation is alleged to have occurred; and
(B) request the Attorney General of the United States to institute a civil action for the imposition and collection of the civil penalty specified in subsection (a) or (b).
(e) USE OF PENALTY MONEY COLLECTED- After deduction of costs attributable to collection, money collected from penalties shall be--
(1) deposited into the trust fund established pursuant to the Act entitled 'An Act to provide that the United States shall aid the States in wildlife-restoration projects, and for other purposes', approved September 2, 1937 (16 U.S.C. 669) (commonly known as the 'Pitman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act'), to support the activities authorized by such Act and undertaken by State wildlife management agencies; or
(2) used in such other manner as the Secretary determines will enhance the funding and implementation of--
(A) the North American Waterfowl Management Plan signed by the Secretary of the Interior and the Minister of Environment for Canada in May 1986; or
(B) a similar program that the Secretary determines will enhance wildlife management--
(i) on Federal lands; or
(ii) on private or State-owned lands when the efforts will also provide a benefit to wildlife management objectives on Federal lands.

SEC. 4606. OTHER RELIEF.
(a) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF- Injunctive relief against a violation of section 4604 may be sought by--
(1) the head of a State agency with jurisdiction over fish or wildlife management;
(2) the Attorney General of the United States; or
(3) any person who is or would be adversely affected by the violation, or a hunting or sportsman's organization to which the person belongs.
(b) DAMAGES AND ATTORNEY'S FEES- Any person who is or would be adversely affected by a violation of section 4604, or a hunting or sportsman's organization to which the person belongs, may bring a civil action to recover--
(1) actual and punitive damages; and
(2) reasonable attorney's fees.
Yup, the majority of Republicans and Democrats voted in favor of it. It was then sent back to the House for revision. While there, the House Republicans didn't agree.

Image

It went back to the Senate and just like the House Republicans. The Senate Republicans didn't agree with all the way the bill was.

Image

The bill passed the Senate for the final time and was engrossed and sent to the President for signature. You can actually look up the entire legislative history of HR 3355 here.

If Senate Republicans originally didn't vote in favor of the bill. I would have further faith in the Party. But my honest opinion then and now is that the Republicans don't give a shit about gun rights. If they did then why did the vast majority of Senate Republicans voted in favor of HR 3355 the first time it was in the Senate?


User avatar
tector
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 2:50 pm
Location: Broward/Sunrise

Post by tector » Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:19 pm

rentprop1 wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:56 pm
awesome post :mrgreen:
Yes

rug357
Posts: 164
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 3:03 pm
Location: P. Pines, FL

Post by rug357 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:58 pm

I remember being happy to buy couple of 15 round Glock 19 mags for $30 each. Later after I sold that Glock 19 I sold those mags for $50 and the buyer was happy to buy them at that price.

User avatar
SteyrAUG
Posts: 218
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:17 am

Post by SteyrAUG » Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:20 pm

Miami_JBT wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:47 pm
Here is the PDF of the final engrossed bill that was HR 3355.

I was speaking of a different bill that was in September of 2004 PRIOR to the sunset.

Joecruiser
Posts: 64
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2018 12:00 am
Location: Coral Gables

Post by Joecruiser » Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:05 pm

This should be a sticky. Excellent post, Thxs for taking the time to research and post.

BTW, I bought, brand new in 1998, the exact same Bushy with the Y comp.
Still have it...unfired.

I paid $980 out the door with a really sweet 10 ROUND mag. Still have the receipt!
This was at one of the last gun shows held at Dinner Key Auditorium.
City of Miami pols voted to ban shows at city owned facilities.

I also "scored" two 30 Rd milspec aluminium mags for $80. What a deal...they were going for much more.
I was prepping for Y2K...prices were insane...

But I remember walking outta there with a big smile on my face carry my new AR.
aka: Dolfan

User avatar
RKBA
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2018 9:28 am
Location: Tampa Bay, FL

Post by RKBA » Sun Sep 15, 2019 11:08 pm

Toward the last years of the ban....Glock mags were around $130 ea.

The last of the AR-15 pre-ban mags sold out in the early 2000's. They weren't as expensive as the Glocks. I do not remember much of a secondary market for those at all. People stashed those away for SHTF. I'd see some almost completely destroyed ones at the gun show for $30. Nothing you'd ever want to trust your life to.

You can thank Tom Delay for killing the ban. Bush didn't want the ban in terms of agenda, which is why he didn't go around promoting it like Clinton did. He reluctantly said a few times he'd sign it when forced to comment. Which he absolutely would.

Delay, despite hard pressure from the leftist media - stood his ground. He knew what happened in 1994 and did not want a repeat. He also knew that the only reason the Republicans held the house for those years, for the first time in decades was because of the AWB. Even Clinton admitted it.

The House did the will of the people and let the AWB die. But they are no heroes.

On the other hand...the House Republicans did little to nothing to repeal the ban. They repealed the ban in a symbolic vote in 1996 I think it was. Symbolic because it would not be repealed by the Senate, and would have been vetoed by Clinton. It was safe to do it, since it was dead on arrival.

A Republican House, Senate and President would NOT have repealed the ban had it been permanent. Remember that, and remember it well. It was much, much, much easier politically to let a bill with a SUNSET provision just die off, than it is to actively kill it by legislative process.

Just look at the Hearing Protection Act in 2016. The friendliest House and Senate and President for the Second Amendment in our lifetime and perhaps since the 1800's and they dragged their feet and could not pass the deregulation of suppressors. Not even firearms, a firearm accessory!!! Of course, very well timed mass shootings helped squash that, but that's another story....

Gun control is a ONE_WAY street. To this day, there has never been a single instance of firearm ban that has been reversed or repealed. The sunsetting AWB doesn't count, because they didn't have to actually man up and do something about it.

There will never be another "sunset clause" again.

You'd be lucky to get "grandfather" clauses in the future. These are only added to make adoption of such bans more possible by not offending existing owners. This is generational warfare. Also an appeal to selfishness. And an appeal to greed for some who like to speculate in these goods. If you're sitting on 2,000 mags you bought for $5 that will be $100+ each in a few years....

That is why the NFA is never going away for machine guns. It's not that the government legitimately fears the increase in effectiveness by having select-fire weapons as opposed to the millions of semi-automatics out there already, it's because the owners of large collections of NFA weapons are invested and aren't in the business of losing money. That class of people belongs to the business and investment class, who have a lot of political influence. I'm not talking about your above average income redneck who saved up and got 1 full auto AR. There's a lot of wealthy people who own a lot of NFA stuff. Wealthy people also have a big issue with exclusivity. They thrive on having what others don't.

The foreign bans will not go away either, for much the same reason. Every ban of foreign import has been to protect domestic manufacturers. That's a fact. This is why there was very little noise made about those. NRA's biggest donors are not gun owners.

We've had only one pro-gun'ish law in the last 30 years...and it wasn't really pro gun but an industry protection bill so manufacturers wouldn't get sued out of existence.

Before that, was the 1986 Orwellian named "Firearm Owners Protection Act" ...which fixed some of the really big problems with the 1968 Gun Control Act, but did not at all liberate anything, only fixed procedural matters and...gave us the ban on new full-autos via the Hughes Amendment.

All that said...prior to that it was purely downhill. In our era...all we've been able to do is halt it and bring it to level. We were on the verge of getting the pendulum to swing back but that's been halted. Now we're on the verge of going back.

Looking at the newer improved versions of the AWB, they've learned from their mistakes and those will be extremely hard to circumvent. Think California style shit.

The good news is, the culture has changed. During that time, there has been a massive shift in carry laws. Big wins there. But carry isn't where it's at.

America is more pro-gun and pro-semi-auto than ever. More owners, more interest. Old hysteria and crazy ideas are dead. More mainstream. On the other hand, the opposition is more emotion based than ever and leveraging the mass shootings, despite the lowest crime rates ever.

We have not lost the culture war...but instead, this is the anti-gunners "battle of the bulge" ..one big counter offensive. We really need to step up and squash this, then move hard for promoting our culture. If we can get through this relatively unscathed, they will be in big trouble. Never before have they had to rely on billionaires and mass media coordinated campaigns. This is all out desperation on their part. Through social media, they know exactly how strong our side is and what the people really think. That is why they are in an all out frenzy and are throwing the kitchen sink at this. 24/7 news cycle, hundreds of millions being spent, corporate interference, internet warfare and censorship.

It's all true. 10+ years of data mining and social media has shown them just how pro-gun Americans are and they are freaked out.

Anyway...


Please don't be a defeatist or spread gloom and doom. Fear is contagious and so many owners are ready to just give up and bury their guns and hope for some fantasy in the future. It doesn't need to be that way. It's literally 10 to 1 in our favor...get active and we can win.

Post Reply