The new assault weapons ban
From Diane Feinstein. Instead of two evil features, it’s one evil feature that calls for a ban. Also, grandfathered weapons would fall under the NFA ($200 tax and lengthy sales process) like machine guns.
No thanks.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
December 27th, 2012 at 11:47 am
Yeah, good luck with that one, Feinstein. NFA background checks are a rather lengthy process. Not to mention that a requirement like that is a great area of the bill to attack from a judicial standpoint. I seem to remember some ruling saying that you can’t put unreasonable restrictions on someone for weapons in common use…
December 27th, 2012 at 11:49 am
She’s asking for a ridiculous amount of restrictions so she can “settle” for less. It will be touted as reasonable and a compromise between pro-gun and anti-gun groups.
At the end of the day we’ll be screwed.
December 27th, 2012 at 11:50 am
And what the hell are assault pistols?
December 27th, 2012 at 11:53 am
Assault pistols are any pistols she can convince people are scary, and that she doesnt like… Eventually, all pistols. I’ve been waiting for the text of this to come out.
December 27th, 2012 at 12:02 pm
The Tec-22 is an assault pistol. It assaults you every time you shoot it. (the top cover of mine blows off after about 3 rounds)
December 27th, 2012 at 12:15 pm
A Beretta 92FS with a threaded barrel would be illegal under this.
December 27th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
Bottom line, folks: we hold the line here, or we’re f***ed.
They’re going to milk Sandy Hook for all it’s worth.
If they can successfully use Sandy Hook, they will push further than they have ever gone before.
If they cannot push anything, even after Sandy Hook, then gun control will wither on the vine. There may even be reversals and repeals of existing laws.
Now here is the scenario that keeps me up at night: they manage to pass substantial gun control, and they do not suffer at the polls in 2014. That will show them that gun control is the electoral winner. If that comes to pass, it’s on to a complete firearms ban and (God help us!) civil war.
December 27th, 2012 at 12:26 pm
“so she can “settle” for less”
That is the reason I support GOA as opposed to the NRA. If you want compromise then stick with the NRA, if you want unfettered rights then the GOA is for you. The issue with an all out ban is as follows:
http://www.naturalnews.com/038471_Bill_of_Rights_declaration_America.html
This will all lead to civil disobedience and an outright ignoring of federal law. Some will willingly turn in their guns, but there are many that will refuse, the question is at that point do they have a right to protect themselves against a tyranical government that comes to strip them of their rights without the appropriate 2/3rds ratification?
December 27th, 2012 at 1:03 pm
If they can’t get anything out of Sandy Hook, they’ll set someone loose on another school, then another after that, etc., until they get what they want. The fed’s already broken the contract as far as I’m concerned; if I obey one of their laws it’s merely coincidental.
December 27th, 2012 at 1:19 pm
Supporting GOA will also do you about as much political good as praying to Shiva.
December 27th, 2012 at 1:36 pm
Isn’t this all just posturing, though? Are the red-state Democrats (especially those on the ballot on 2014) going to vote for this? Even if it passes the Senate, can it possibly pass the House?
This seems like mere grandstanding.
December 27th, 2012 at 1:46 pm
I understand that money is tight nowadays, but what is so bloody difficult about sending $5 to NRA, $5 to GOA, and $5 to SAF? If every gun owner in America did that much, we’d be a whole lot better off. No politician would dare follow Feinstein and her ilk off the cliff.
Instead, people are paying $3000 for a POS AR-15 that two weeks ago was retailing for $750. If Feinstein has her way, we’ll all be turning those guns back in anyway (or getting a midnight no-knock “visit” from the po-po, complete with the requisite bullet-riddled pooch).
December 27th, 2012 at 2:32 pm
The bill is DOA; there’s no way it will pass the House. The Democrats had to spend every penny of their political capital to pass the original AW Ban in ’94 even though they controlled both Houses of Congress, and that was far less restrictive than this bill.
More importantly, the Dems remember what happened in the mid-term elections that year, and they also remember what happened in 2010, the last time they forced a controversial, unpopular bill through Congress.
No, this bill is either Feinstein’s wish list that she doesn’t expect to pass, or it’s like what Weebs suggested: An extreme starting point, so she can appear to “compromise” and get the bill she wanted in the first place.
December 27th, 2012 at 2:39 pm
blounttruth, have you ever wondered why Democrats and anti-gunners only mention the NRA when they talk about the “evil gun lobby”?
It’s because the GOA isn’t even on their radar. To them, the GOA is a mole on the NRA’s buttocks: If they kill the NRA, then everything else will die.
December 27th, 2012 at 3:16 pm
Doesn’t registration under NFA come with inspections (surrendering of 4th amendment rights) and storage requirements?
Wouldn’t that be an end run on Heller for commonly-used firearms?
December 27th, 2012 at 3:17 pm
The day our government mandates me and countless other free Americans to pony-up an additional $200.00 and wait for some bureaucratic stamp of approval for our “grandfathered” semi-automatic rifles and handguns, will be the day that the U. S. military and other federal and state government employees will have to do some serious soul searching to arrive at their own definitions and interpretations of American constitutional inherent rights; and opposing their fellow Americans and statesmen who will not take kindly to the usurpation, abrogations and infringements of those coveted rights.
I agree: DiFi just needs her Progressive ego stroked, She and her media are despicably and wickedly using the deaths of innocent children by an insane subhuman to step up on their soapbox solely for the advancement of DiFi’s Progressive, “If I could have took them all, I would have”, anti-gun agenda…
December 27th, 2012 at 3:46 pm
blounttruth Says:
“so she can “settle” for less”
That is the reason I support GOA as opposed to the NRA.
But with the exception of that one time Heston went off script the NRA has been unwavering in it’s opposition to “assault weapons” bans, right? This is notable, especially in reference to harder line groups, in that it was the first major piece of Federal anti-gun legislation that passed without the NRA’s approval (the usual “compromise” that’s being worried about here).
The NRA is still taking a no compromise stance and I don’t see that changing.
December 27th, 2012 at 3:48 pm
JKB, there are no ‘inspections’ for NFA items. You don’t surrender any 4th amendment rights as an individual owner. The BATFE doesn’t do inspections on non-FFLs.
On the other hand, you do have to take reasonable precautions to avoid unauthorized ‘transfers’, which the BATFE takes a broad view of. This effectively means you need to have them locked up so no-one can just pick it up.
For example, my wife in not listed as a trustee in my NFA/gun trust. Thus, she can’t have the combo to the safe. If she could access it, the BAFTE would probably treat that as a transfer. If she’d follow me over to a notary, however, and we have an addendum to the trust signed and notarized saying that she is now a co-trustee, I could give her the combo, and no transfer would be involved. That’s the difference between a felony and not: the cost of a notary and a printed-out piece of paper with two signatures on it.
December 27th, 2012 at 3:53 pm
I LMAO when I read her study results in support of a new ban and then read further what the studies actually said. Money quote:
“Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement. AW’s were rarely used in crimes even before the ban.”
December 27th, 2012 at 4:17 pm
Put up resistance!
December 27th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
One feature now instead of two? She’s double dog daring us.
December 27th, 2012 at 5:06 pm
“Assault pistols are any pistols she can convince people are scary, and that she doesnt like… EVENUALLY, ALL PISTOLS. I’ve been waiting for the text of this to come out.”
Except the pistols carried by her bodyguards.
December 27th, 2012 at 6:32 pm
What about the requirement to report every time you cross a state line with an NFA weapon?
December 27th, 2012 at 7:31 pm
What about it?
December 27th, 2012 at 7:35 pm
If every AR-15 must be registered as NFA, and its’ crossing a state line to go hunting, target shooting, etc. has to be reported to BATFE, won’t that kinda overwhelm the switchboards?
December 27th, 2012 at 9:10 pm
Notification is in writing, submitted well in advance
December 27th, 2012 at 9:27 pm
You don’t need to provide notification for silencers and AOWs. I think that only applies to machine guns, SBRs, and SBSs .
How this would notionally apply to semi-auto firearms is up for grabs, but I think functionally the requirement on the government side would take took too many man hours, too many full time employees, and round-the-clock manning at the call center, and the shooting public wouldn’t put up with the notification rules and approval process and delays that the NFA branch has, so they’d probably be treated like suppressors.
I suppose the entire structure of the law would be up for legal challenge once 90 million people are affected by it. The courts will be FLOODED with challenges of people with legitimate standing. A lawsuit should accompany every delay, every denial.
December 27th, 2012 at 10:03 pm
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/alert-legislation-details-senate-to-ban-hundreds-of-semiautomatic-rifles-handguns-shotguns-magazines-includes-fingerprint-registration-requirements_12272012?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SHTFplan+%28SHTF+Plan+-+When+It+Hits+The+Fan%2C+Don%27t+Say+We+Didn%27t+Warn+You%29
December 27th, 2012 at 10:04 pm
An intolerable act.
December 27th, 2012 at 10:55 pm
Not now. Not ever.
I will not run. I will not submit. I aim to misbehave.
December 27th, 2012 at 11:01 pm
blounttruth, how about that same 90 million gun owners trying to get multiple CLEO sign-offs at the same time?
This might be Di-Fi demanding “Arms and Legs” and settling for “Fingers and Toes”, i.e. approximately what the 1994 ban was, without the sunset clause.
If the R’s in the House cave on this, I see no need to ever support that party again at any level.
December 28th, 2012 at 12:19 am
Blaming the GOP for “caving” that they haven’t done yet will look pretty silly if you’ve not flooded your GOP representative with mail.
If you’ve not written letters to all of them this week, I won’t take a kind view of kvetching about the NRA or GOP.
December 28th, 2012 at 3:50 am
Now, I’m not exactly an expert on state-by-state NFA item regulations, but don’t some states specifically prohibit ownership of anything covered by the NFA? If so, would that not result in de facto confiscation of heretofore legally owned firearms?
December 28th, 2012 at 9:39 am
I have a Marlin Model 60 .22LR semiautomatic with a tube magazine. It can hold more than 10 .22 Shorts, and I can already be arrested were I to take it from my home in Texas, where it is legal and unremarkable, to New Jersey, where it is considered an illegal “assault weapon” already. I will only mention NJ’s legal penalties for possession of any .22 hollowpoint cartridges.
The Senator would make me a felon for what I consider a kid’s plinker.
Not just NO, Senator, but HELL NO!
December 28th, 2012 at 9:53 am
Doctors are also making it easier to diagnose you with a mental illness. There are attacks coming from many fronts.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/turning-straw-gold/201212/physical-illnesses-may-soon-be-labeled-mental-disorders
December 28th, 2012 at 10:19 am
Inebriated Arsonist (which is an awesome name, btw):
I believe that the state laws against SBRs, SBSs, MGs, and Suppressors don’t tie them to the NFA.
Here in TN, all those items are illegal, unless they are in the NFRTR. That’s the only connection to the NFA. So my legislature would have to add whatever language DiFi’s bill ends up with in order to make it a state crime to possess an AR.
December 29th, 2012 at 7:52 pm
I have an Assault Pistol. It is very efficient at burning through ammo.
December 29th, 2012 at 10:56 pm
I just finished putting together a point-by-point destruction of Senator Feinstein’s “proof” of the efficacy of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban which she is using as part of her reasoning for the introduction of a new ban in Congress.
Please take the time to read this and forward it to your Congressional representatives in the Senate and House, as well as forwarding it to any and all whom you feel would be interested in or benefit from this information.
This work is being released under a Creative Commons license and is freely distributable for non-commercial usage as long as it is unaltered and source attribution is given.
http://pc3c.org/files/feinstein_fisking.pdf