From: [g--er--y] at [iluvatar.tip.duke.edu] (Guerry A. Semones)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: NC Semi-Auto Ban passes committee
Date: 2 Jun 93 13:17:25 GMT

In article <[C 7 yHIK Dqy] at [cbnewsc.cb.att.com]> [r--s] at [cbnewsc.cb.att.com] (Morris  
the Cat) writes:
> House Bill 984, a bill banning semi-automatic firearms, will be heard
> again in the House Judiciary I Committee next Tuesday, June 1, at
> 10:00 a.m.. The bill was killed in Committee last week, however, the
> Committee Chairman, who is also the bill sponsor, wants to try it
> again with an added amendment.  The amendment calls for confiscation
> of all presently owned semi-automatic firearms -- including your
> semi-automatic hunting rifles and shotguns!  Under this amendment, if
> you are found in possession of one of these firearms, you could face
> a Class I felony charge, and possibly serve time in prison.  
>  
Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, this bill passed in the committee  
yesterday.  The chairman and those who voted for it (I do not know the  
vote ratio for/against) have absolutely no interest in reality, but rather  
an investment in politically correct posturing.  Reportedly, Mr. Michaux,  
the chairman, is pushing this bill, not for the bill's sake, but for the  
maneuvering and compromise-positioning he can use it for.

Secondly, IMHO, interpreting this bill as a semi-auto ban is too  
restrictive.  Having read the portion of the bill describing the types of  
weapons to be banned, I say that it might be worse.  How so?  The bill out  
right describes as a machine gun or submachine gun, ANY weapon NOT  
requiring MANUAL reloading between EVERY SINGLE shot.  That would even  
include my Dad's old over-and-under, double-barreled shotgun.  This is a  
GUN ban bill.  Revolvers even fall under the ban by this definition.  The  
bill then proceeds to define, as a SEPARATE ENTITY from the aforementioned  
definitions, a semiauto weapon.  As the interpretation of these  
definitions is left up to the Attorney General.....

Lordy.

Thirdly, and last, Mr. Michaux kept the bill alive by finding  
appropriation funding for the bill.  Originally the bill died because of  
an non-appropriations bill deadline.  Last week, the bill died a second  
death when Michaux failed to get the committee to agree to tag on a  
$50,000 appropriations amendment.  Over the weekend, Michaux worked a deal  
with another committee member (support my bill, I support yours, or else)  
and, suprise, yesterday they tagged the approprations amendment on.  The  
$50,000 amendment, and here's the other bad news (as if....), is for the  
State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) to establish a statewide Registration  
system.  

Lordy, Lordy.

I do not know YET when this bill will make it to the floor.  Those of you  
from NC, get on the phone!  

On the other hand, I want to know what Mr. Michaux REAL motivations are.   
He stated that the people want to take back their communities (presumably  
from assault weapons).  Interesting, since one of the leaders of the  
Durham City SWAT, and a Durham City police lieutenant testified that this  
bill would do no good for them.  Durham is Mr. Michaux's home district.   
Hmmmmm.  But, as I mentioned above, there are indications that the whole  
thing is a matter of posturing: posturing with the Bill of Rights as the  
deciding card.

Lordy, Lordy, Lordy.

--
- Guerry A. Semones ([g--er--y] at [iluvatar.tip.duke.edu])
- Duke University Talent Identification Program				
- Disclaimer: As my views are NOT polically correct, they are not Duke's
- Know the Constitution and help preserve it!