New Gun Legislation

If the Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s new law goes into effect, even my simple .22 above will be considered an assault rifle and I’ll have to forfeit it to the government upon my death, as opposed to passing it down to my kids like most of us do. Nice huh? Not to mention you can forget ever buying one like it again.

Take a look at some of her goals with the new gun ban. Time is running out. Contact your representatives NOW if you want your rights preserved. Otherwise this woman appears ready to trample all over them.

Looks like I’m about to max out my credit card before January 22nd. I wonder how much the new ban will increase “assault” weapons sales between now and January 22nd? This lady is an idiot!

I’m too tired to put my usual flavor of commentary on this, so I’ll just cut and paste for now and I’ll save my own responses for a later edit.

Here are some of the changes she plans to enact:

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 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 1941 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 transfer 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.  But most of the guns on the list either wouldn’t be banned in the first place, or would already be exempted by other provisions. On the other hand, the list inevitably misses every model of rifle and shotgun that wasn’t being manufactured or imported in the years covered by the reference books Sen. Feinstein’s staff consulted. That means an unknown number of absolutely conventional semi-auto rifles and shotguns, many of them out of production for decades, would be banned under the draft bill.

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, available here.  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 (already 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 will most likely introduce her bill on January 22nd.  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.  And yesterday, a story from The Blaze noted that Obama’s point man on gun control–Vice President Biden–has promised that Obama will pass a gun control bill by the end of the month.



Comments

New Gun Legislation — 5 Comments

  1. Really bad idea people…. it’s trouncing the 2nd amendment and a step in the wrong direction. I am liberal minded, and even I know this won’t work. If you want “gun control” treat it like you would a car or a home… a personal investment. Make it an individual’s responsibility, not a negative evil item.

  2. It amazes me everytime D-Fi gets reelected. She always finds some kind of “feel good legislation” or some way of saying to her constituents “look what I’ve done for you.” But, all the while she chips away at the rights of one set of citizens, she also builds stronger tyranny over all US Citizens.

  3. The elected government wants to take away your rights and will jump on every tragedy to do so. The attacks of 9/11 motivated the Patriot Act, and now the emotions of the Sandy Hook Ele shooting are being sensationalized and exploited in the efforts to disarm millions of innocent, law-abiding US Citizens who choose to own guns. But, why were those guns not locked and secured, and how could a mentally ill person gain access to those guns?
    There is no tragedy great enough to motivate me to surrender my freedoms.

  4. Pingback: Write your Representative | Eight Minutes of Fame

  5. All I can say is gun restrictions haven’t worked in Australia and unfortunately we didn’t put up enough of a fight to prevent this and unlike what is proposed in the USA under this new bill, we had to hand in our rifles that were no longer “allowed” immediately and have them put through a crusher, and then to add insult to injury we were given a gov’t payback of a pittance of what these rifles were worth! It was enough to break your heart. This did nothing to alleviate the murders etc that happen. Just made it hard for the common man who was already doing all the right things when it comes to gun safety. Sad, sad state of affairs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Disclaimer: If your comments harass another person, use vulgar language, or are otherwise discriminatory, we reserve the right to delete them and ban the user.