Congress is at it again

Topics without replies are pruned every 365 days. Not moderated.

Moderator: Dux


Topic author
The Cunning Stunt
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:27 am

Congress is at it again

Post by The Cunning Stunt »

Who saw this coming. In the wake of all tragedies you can always depend on our self-serving congressmen and women to capitalize on it for publicity.

Edit: forgot, they don't really need a reason to do that. It just helps.

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/feder ... -bill.aspx
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)—author of the federal “assault weapon” and “large” ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004—has announced that on the first day of the new Congress—January 3rd— she will introduce a bill to which her 1994 ban will pale by comparison. On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, “I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012.

According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein’s website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of “assault weapon” that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners. Some of the changes in Feinstein’s new bill are as follows:

Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms. The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.

Adopts new lists of prohibited external features. For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the “pistol grip” of which “protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon,” the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any “grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” Also, the new bill adds “forward grip” to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as “a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.” Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban.

Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein’s 1994 ban listed “grenade launcher” as one of the prohibiting features for rifles. Her 2013 bill carries goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing “rocket launcher.” Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban. Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add “nuclear bomb,” “particle beam weapon,” or something else equally far-fetched to the features list.
Expands the definition of “assault weapon” by including:

Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1944 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS.

Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” except for tubular-magazine .22s.

Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches,” any “semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel.

Requires owners of existing “assault weapons” to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.

Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.” Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.

Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect. Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.

Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.” Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.

Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.”

The Department of Justice study. On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders. To the contrary, this is what the study said: “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders. Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995. . . . However, with only one year of post-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban. Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously.”

“Assault weapon” numbers and murder trends. From the imposition of Feinstein's “assault weapon” ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of “assault weapons” has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an “assault weapon” is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE’s firearm manufacturer reports, availablehere. From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s—all models of which Feinstein’s new bill defines as “assault weapons”—rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation's murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type.


Traces: Feinstein makes several claims, premised on firearm traces, hoping to convince people that her 1994 ban reduced the (relatively infrequent) use of “assault weapons” in crime. However, traces do not indicate how often any type of gun is used in crime. As the Congressional Research Service and the BATFE have explained, not all firearms that are traced have been used in crime, and not all firearms used in crime are traced. Whether a trace occurs depends on whether a law enforcement agency requests that a trace be conducted. Given that existing “assault weapons” were exempted from the 1994 ban and new “assault weapons” continued to be made while the ban was in effect, any reduction in the percentage of traces accounted for by “assault weapons” during the ban, would be attributable to law enforcement agencies losing interest in tracing the firearms, or law enforcement agencies increasing their requests for traces on other types of firearms, as urged by the BATFE for more than a decade.


Call Your U.S. Senators and Representative: As noted, Feinstein intends to introduce her bill on January 3rd. President Obama has said that gun control will be a “central issue” of his final term in office, and he has vowed to move quickly on it.

Contact your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 gun and magazine ban. Our elected representatives in Congress must hear from you if we are going to defeat this gun ban proposal. You can write your Representatives and Senators by using our Write Your Representatives tool here: http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-loca ... -reps.aspx

User avatar

Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21247
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by Turdacious »

On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, “I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012.
Wow-- did she color them too?
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule


Topic author
The Cunning Stunt
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:27 am

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by The Cunning Stunt »

Turdacious wrote:
On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, “I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012.
Wow-- did she color them too?
Tax dollars hard at work.

User avatar

tough old man
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: Hell

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by tough old man »

I'm assuming, since every cop I know has an M4 or a variant "Assault Rifle" that they will be exempt from any of this.
"I am the author of my own misfortune, I don't need a ghost writer" - Ian Dury


"Legio mihi nomen est, quia multi sumus."


climber511
Gunny
Posts: 961
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 9:59 pm

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by climber511 »

Congress is broken on so many levels. She has apparently looked at pictures of these guns twice now? That certainly makes her an expert and qualified to make law about them WTH. And does anyone believe criminals would pay any attention at all to this?

User avatar

Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21247
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by Turdacious »

Image
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

User avatar

DrDonkeyLove
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 8034
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 4:04 am
Location: Deep in a well

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by DrDonkeyLove »

FWIW I just wrote a short and reasoned letter to my Dem state Senator (reportedly a reasonable and powerful man) soliciting his help with the vile Gov. Cuomo and his attack dog Bloomberg. Perhaps it will do some minor bit of good when Cuomo gets all confiscatory in the next legislative session.

I may do the same with our two Fed senators so I can at least tell myself that I tried to work within the system.
Mao wrote:Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party

User avatar

baffled
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 8873
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:56 pm

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by baffled »

Feinstein and Boxer are a great example of what is wrong with this state.

I cannot, for the life of me, understand how we continue to elect two people who have so consistently exhibited that they shouldn't be trusted to watch a cat, let alone represent millions of tax payers.
"Gentle in what you do, Firm in how you do it"
- Buck Brannaman

User avatar

Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21247
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by Turdacious »

climber511 wrote:Congress is broken on so many levels. She has apparently looked at pictures of these guns twice now? That certainly makes her an expert and qualified to make law about them WTH. And does anyone believe criminals would pay any attention at all to this?
I'm pretty sure she can afford private security: http://www.rollcall.com/50richest/the-5 ... 112th.html
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

User avatar

baffled
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 8873
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:56 pm

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by baffled »

Turdacious wrote:
climber511 wrote:Congress is broken on so many levels. She has apparently looked at pictures of these guns twice now? That certainly makes her an expert and qualified to make law about them WTH. And does anyone believe criminals would pay any attention at all to this?
I'm pretty sure she can afford private security: http://www.rollcall.com/50richest/the-5 ... 112th.html
I don't know if everyone else can afford private security, but they did just get a raise.
"Gentle in what you do, Firm in how you do it"
- Buck Brannaman

User avatar

kreator
Top
Posts: 1287
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:52 am

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by kreator »

WTF? A pay raise?? I don't care if they haven't gotten one since 2009. It might be pennies to the national budget but it's symbolically a slap in the face.


Also, why is everyone's argument against assault rifles that 'you don't need them for hunting'? Not on this site, but I've heard it countless times in the past week(s).
The 2nd Amendment wasn't created for hunting. And self-defense against drug-addict burglars probably wasn't on the founders' minds when they crafted it either. It was created so that the government wouldn't have monopoly over physical armament.

User avatar

baffled
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 8873
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:56 pm

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by baffled »

I like how the idiots in the comments at HuffPo bitch about how these workers are doing more work for the same pay.

Even if that's true, so fucking what? They're already making more in pay combined with benefits, on average, than similar workers in the private sector. All the way up until you get MDs, Phds etc.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/ ... pensation/
"Gentle in what you do, Firm in how you do it"
- Buck Brannaman


The Ginger Beard Man
Sgt. Major
Posts: 4376
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:27 pm
Location: 4th largest city in America

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by The Ginger Beard Man »

Blaidd Drwg wrote:Disengage from the outcome and do work.
Jezzy Bell wrote:Use a fucking barbell, pansy.

User avatar

tough old man
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: Hell

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by tough old man »

LOL! Above his own laws!
"I am the author of my own misfortune, I don't need a ghost writer" - Ian Dury


"Legio mihi nomen est, quia multi sumus."

User avatar

nafod
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 12781
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:01 pm
Location: Looking in your window

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by nafod »

tough old man wrote:LOL! Above his own laws!
Eh?

His NRA legislative rating, looks to me like he's been suckling on the gun nut teat...
1998 - B
2000 - B+
2002 - B+
2004 - A
2006 - A
2008 - A
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/sol ... 7Us6xZL.99
Don’t believe everything you think.


Topic author
The Cunning Stunt
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:27 am

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by The Cunning Stunt »

nafod wrote:
tough old man wrote:LOL! Above his own laws!
Eh?

His NRA legislative rating, looks to me like he's been suckling on the gun nut teat...
1998 - B
2000 - B+
2002 - B+
2004 - A
2006 - A
2008 - A
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/sol ... 7Us6xZL.99
The hokey website was sort of a red flag that the article wasn't fully accurate.

User avatar

kreator
Top
Posts: 1287
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:52 am

Re: Congress is at it again

Post by kreator »

ecalpal wrote:
nafod wrote:
tough old man wrote:LOL! Above his own laws!
Eh?

His NRA legislative rating, looks to me like he's been suckling on the gun nut teat...
1998 - B
2000 - B+
2002 - B+
2004 - A
2006 - A
2008 - A
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/sol ... 7Us6xZL.99
The hokey website was sort of a red flag that the article wasn't fully accurate.

Yeah I tend to leave any website that says "Barack HUSSEIN Obama" somewhere on it.

Post Reply