What if.... a 1990s style "ban" passed again?

[dusty88]

I know "molon labe" and all but ... seriously wondering.... what do you think would happen if a ban on semiautomatic rifles, magazines that hold over 10 rounds, etc were to actually pass on the federal level?

I think the political fallout would be significant, but not so simplistic as last time. The country is much more divided now.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I know "molon labe" and all but ... seriously wondering.... what do you think would happen if a ban on semiautomatic rifles, magazines that hold over 10 rounds, etc were to actually pass on the federal level?

If you lived through the Clinton ban then you know that the only thing that will happen is that prices will rise slightly.

Dems lost the House because of it as well.

I think the political fallout would be significant, but not so simplistic as last time. The country is much more divided now

Yes, the country was not divided in 1994 as there was only one political party.

 

[dusty88]

If you lived through the Clinton ban then you know that the only thing that will happen is that prices will rise slightly.

It seems to me that semi-automatic rifles have become a lot more popular. But obviously the reaction depends somewhat on the wording, grandfathering, etc.

Dems lost the House because of it as well.

but the law wasn't overturned, it had to expire.

Yes, the country was not divided in 1994 as there was only one political party.

I do think the political division is perhaps far more extreme now.

For example in many voting districts the Republican or Democratic presidential candidates used to win by fairly narrow margins. In many of those same districts, the margins were much larger on EITHER side. And I've never before seen the fear and hatred of the "other" voter as I did this year. Some of my liberal clients in Indy were afraid to go vote thinking they were going to be harassed by Trump supporters. And we all know what the liberals did after the election, including plenty of vandalism.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Times have changed. I'm not sure we can assume 1994 and its aftermath will repeat or echo. I'm not sure we can assume they'll simply ban the sales this time. Cynical, I know. But I sense the landscape has changed and I don't even watch that much MSM news.

 

[phylodog]

I believe an attempted ban is very likely to result in a significant change to the fabric of this country.

 

[Brad69]

Agree with phylodog the country is in or out and the progressive wing is far out of touch with the rest of us and the gun control is masqueraded as a issue along with income differences ect.

 

[jamil]

If you lived through the Clinton ban then you know that the only thing that will happen is that prices will rise slightly.

Dems lost the House because of it as well.



Yes, the country was not divided in 1994 as there was only one political party.

Surely you don’t think we’re operating in the same environment as then. Overton’s window is way further left from where it was then.

 

[Kdf101]

I remember the last ban, I don’t think a new one would look the same. But I haven’t seen any real sign that a new one is imminent. I think the “fabric of our country” is going to change. Almost complete polarization, no civil discussion at all most of the time.

 

[churchmouse]

I believe an attempted ban is very likely to result in a significant change to the fabric of this country.

I truly believe the fabric of our country is already significantly changed.

 

[Tombs]

If we had a 1994 style ban today, at least a quarter of the entire US population would be a felon, and the majority of that quarter wouldn't even comply.

That would be a tipping point for most people, easily. I'm not sure they're arrogant enough to put serious weight behind it, especially after what happened at bundy ranch.

I remember the last ban, I don’t think a new one would look the same. But I haven’t seen any real sign that a new one is imminent. I think the “fabric of our country” is going to change. Almost complete polarization, no civil discussion at all most of the time.

That change is long behind us now.

I haven't been able to have a simple disagreement with another US citizen on political issues, without them flying off the handle at me immediately and violently.

 

[GIJEW]

'1990's style ban' was a ban on future sales and one of the reasons it passed was because the public was less personally invested. There are maybe 20 million new gun owners from the obama years and a lot more people own "assaultive bogey-man guns". If they tried more than a ban on future sales, they'd set up a confrontation that could get real ugly, real quick, that might be more than they are ready for. During the Congressional investigation into 'waco', I recall feinstein berating the BATF and FBI, as if she were a Libertarian, for carrying out her agenda.

The country is more divided now than in the '90s but it's not as divided as it was at the end of the '60s. The Republic survived. The one real wild-card I see, is the acceptance/adoption of hard core socialism and sedition by a generation that apparently didn't learn US history&gov't or economics in high school. A candidate who promised "free college (and anything else) for everybody" would have been laughed off the stage, and a governor and legislature that declared their state to be a sanctuary for people illegally in the country would have faced recall votes. For her stunt, the oakland mayor would probably have faced state and federal charges.

We live in interesting times

 

[Trigger Time]

If we had a 1994 style ban today, at least a quarter of the entire US population would be a felon, and the majority of that quarter wouldn't even comply.

That would be a tipping point for most people, easily. I'm not sure they're arrogant enough to put serious weight behind it, especially after what happened at bundy ranch.



That change is long behind us now.

I haven't been able to have a simple disagreement with another US citizen on political issues, without them flying off the handle at me immediately and violently.

If they're gonna turn us into criminals with the stroke of a pen unjustly then at that point what will we have to lose? That will be the signal

 

[phylodog]

I truly believe the fabric of our country is already significantly changed.

No doubt about that but the changes which have occurred since the original ban have been relatively slow in developing. An attempt at a massive ban would be a little more explosive in nature.

 

[churchmouse]

If we had a 1994 style ban today, at least a quarter of the entire US population would be a felon, and the majority of that quarter wouldn't even comply.

That would be a tipping point for most people, easily. I'm not sure they're arrogant enough to put serious weight behind it, especially after what happened at bundy ranch.



That change is long behind us now.

I haven't been able to have a simple disagreement with another US citizen on political issues, without them flying off the handle at me immediately and violently.

When these discussions go violent I tend to meet force with force. I have a pretty loud voice and will not back down. If that ends it so be it. Get up in my face and get ready.

 

[churchmouse]

No doubt about that but the changes which have occurred since the original ban have been relatively slow in developing. An attempt at a massive ban would be a little more explosive in nature.

Agreed but that would be the "Straw"
Not sure how much more the Camel can stand.

 

[Trigger Time]

Agreed but that would be the "Straw"
Not sure how much more the Camel can stand.

The camel is loaded up for the trip and ready to rock. Don't add no more gear or the camel is gonna have to quickly lose some weight

 

[ATM]

I know "molon labe" and all but ...

The defiant elegance of that phrase should not be casually dismissed.

 

[Lwright]

Something about a straw and a camel.

 

[dusty88]

The defiant elegance of that phrase should not be casually dismissed.

Yes you are probably right but it's a lot easier to use the phrase on a keyboard or a t-shirt than to put it into reality.

I don't think the typical anti-gun city dweller has a clue as to what sort of reaction middle America would have to a complete ban, which is what many of them propose.


But right now it looks like the anti-gun crowd is having some success at state levels. That means the straw gets a little more slowly piled on the camel's back. Or maybe it means even more division between the states until that boils over.

I thought we had chosen a state where gun rights were likely to stay strong. But the current Republican state government look pretty much like Democrats if they didn't have that R after their name. And they wouldn't vote on constitutional carry because it might have brought controversy to them that they didn't need. So it won't take much of a swing the other way for them to give in to a new gun regulation as far as I can see.

Vermont and Florida aren't places I expected to pass anti-gun legislation, but there they go.

 

[Indy317]

The mass shootings/killings will likely continue, as I see no reason or way they would just stop. Certain types of firearms make it easier to shoot people faster, and that will get the blame. No one wants to talk about other issues: Schools consolidating and becoming mini-towns, teens and their mental state, how the economy has changed and what it means for young people (cost of higher ed, no middle class paying factory jobs to just walk into anymore, etc.)., how we now live in such a costly society that both parents have to work and many people have to pay others to actually raise their kids in some aspect (some get to use family, others have to find a stranger and just hope for the best based on recommendations).

I feel that it is only a matter of time before a future sale/importation ban of magazine feed semi-auto rifles happens. People will get so sick of the mass killings/shootings that more and more people will be for it. There will be grandfathering with pass down rights to family only. It is possible any currently held "assault" rifle will end up needing to be registered, who knows. People will do whatever they decide but lets face it, most already can say "I got mine!" and so long as no one is coming to take it, they won't care enough about being able to buy more to put their freedom and career on the line to buy in the black market. Plus the government can always print money and offer $1,500-$2,000 for "assault" rifles and people will slowly take the money if they discover the world didn't end and a bolt or level action gun likely provides self-defense in a similar fashion.

I might be wrong, but after what I saw with the marches, more and more people are going to fall on the side of banning as these shootings continue to happen.