Sen. Feinstein To Introduce "Assault Weapon" Ban

[marshalt]

Yes, because it worked so well in 1994. There was a huge run-up of manufacturing of firearms before the ban went into effect. You could still buy a brand new "assault" rife throughout the life of the ban, it had just been made 10 years earlier.

I'll buy into this ban as soon as someone can tell me why their car needs to go faster than 75 mph. And tell me why car makers can get away with making cars that can break the law. Other than Utah and a couple counties in Texas, you won't find a speed limit higher than 75 mph, so why do you need a car that can go 100 mph? Maybe people like to go to racetracks where they can legally drive their cars fast. Sure, I'll buy that, if you own a sports car. But your average person doesn't take their minivan or sedan to the track, so why do they need to go faster than 75? How about this? All cars from now on will be limited to a top speed of 75, except for law enforcement and emergency vehicles, because a private citizen has no good reason to travel faster than 75.

 

[koalabear]

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) vowed Sunday to introduce legislation to ban assault weapons at the start of the next Congress.
“I’m going to introduce in the Senate and the same bill will be introduced in the House, a bill to ban assault weapons. It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession. Not retroactively but prospectively. And it will ban the same for big clips, drums or strips of more than 10 bullets. So there will be a bill. We’ve been working on it now for a year,” Feinstein said on NBC’s “Meet The Press” during a discussion about guns following Friday’s deadly mass shooting as a Connecticut school.

Feinstein said she was confident such a measure could pass. In a separate interview on Sunday, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he too was was optimistic about the prospect of passing a gun control measure.

“I think we can get something done,” said Schumer on CBS’s “Face The Nation.” Schumer advocated focusing on three areas: Banning assault weapons, limiting the size of clips, and making it harder for “mentally unstable” individuals to obtain firearms.

(I'd prefer a ban on mentally unstable individuals running for political office.)

Same thing she tried to slip into the cyber security bill, it failed.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

The way I heard Obama last night, my guess is he will issue an executive order to ban whatever he decides to ban.

 

[chillywilly2]

Not many people are killed parking a car.

Not many are killed with Automatic Weapons either

 

[SBroadB9]

Not many are killed with Automatic Weapons either

Right. In fact, I don't recall ever hearing of anyone in this country killed with automatic weapons. At least since the era of Machine Gun Floyd.

 

[BotanyBoy]

HELL YEA!! Streets will be a lot safer if people can't buy 1,000 dollar rifles with pistol grips on them anymore!!! Make sure pistol grips on rifles are the first things to go even though they count for 1-2% of all gun crimes and less than 1% of gun homicide..... US senator....absolute genius. Ignore the handgun aka the real problem....get them ergonomics off those super scarry looking guns.

NO ERGONOMCIS!!! BOOOOOO!!!

The knee jerk retard factor is off the charts...

 

[CNYCarol]

I'd be willing to give up mine if you could guarantee you already have everyone elses guns, and knives, arrows, rocks...

 

[Sean Renaud]

I'd be willing to give up mine if you could guarantee you already have everyone elses guns, and knives, arrows, rocks...

Why can't you bring a knife to a knife fight?

 

[koalabear]

Why can't you bring a knife to a knife fight?

They are illegal to possess in some states.

 

[Byron In Exile]

Please inform us why anyone besides law enforcement and military needs a gun that automatically reloads.

Semi-automatic, fully automatic, partially automatic or whatever fraction you want to call it, why do you need a gun that lets you shoot twice without re-aiming? Are you planning to miss?

A revolver does that, too.

 

[zipman]

Well, we all know where DiFi is coming from. <shrug>

We tried the bans before and they had virtually no effect. They didn't even really ban 'assault weapons' in that those firearms are already highly restricted.

It's easy to get everyone on board re. the mental health issue. However, this is the one that is the element that contains within it the greatest potential for abuse. The problem with any such legislation is that it is based on what an individual might do. We already have thousands of veterans denied their 2nd amendment rights without due process based on nothing more than some arbitrary decision by some bureaucrat. In the broadest means of approaching the issue it has to be acknowledged that anyone might snap at anytime. Obviously one could craft a law requiring all prospective firearm owners to take a 'mental competency' test and then construct the test in such a way to virtually deny all applicants their rights. (A similar technique was used by the state of Mississippi to deny blacks voters registration back in the 'Jim Crow' days.)

And all of the above are going to be subject to incremental encroachment because people are still going to snap and they're going to use whatever they can get their hands on to carry out their mischief. So the legislators who feel compelled to 'do something' are going to introduce legislation to cover this case, and that case, and the other case, until such time as every potential case is covered which will necessarily deny everyone access to anything that might be construed as 'dangerous.'

And everyone, no matter your stance on firearms, should be very concerned about the mental stability testing and threshold. Because once they can apply a tool like that in the interest of 'public safety' there is nothing to stop them to applying the same rational to any other activity that may have an effect on public safety.

Ishmael

Did you just compare the shooting to mischief?

Seriously? We aren't talking about egging someone's house on halloween, we are talking about the ability to protect our children when they attend school.

The same thing just happened in China except the assailant only had a knife and while the number of injured is almost the same, no one was killed.

 

[JackLuis]

Sen Feinstein is a twit.

She told me that she wouldn't want to impeach Bush, the Bastard, because that would create too much controversy. ??? She like to ride these issues because she gets a lot of press and nothing ever comes of it, and it only costs a few million to get lots of press!

She should be calling for more mental health professionals. We have a mental health problem in this country. One look at Congress will convince you of that.

 

[Sean Renaud]

They are illegal to possess in some states.

I assume you can name a state where knives are illegal?

 

[Byron In Exile]

Sen Feinstein is a twit.

She told me that she wouldn't want to impeach Bush, the Bastard, because that would create too much controversy. ??? She like to ride these issues because she gets a lot of press and nothing ever comes of it, and it only costs a few million to get lots of press!

She should be calling for more mental health professionals. We have a mental health problem in this country. One look at Congress will convince you of that.

California has the two biggest bozos in the Senate.

This is what our State elects.

Garbage in, garbage out.

 

[unregistered]

 

[phrodeau]

A revolver does that, too.

A revolver needs to be cocked and re-aimed before each shot, and carries a limited number of bullets.

There are only two reasons that people favor semi-automatic pistols over revolvers. They're either too lazy to cock or reload, or they're out to do some serious carnage. Fuck them both.

 

[bra_man69]

I assume you can name a state where knives are illegal?

Texas I can't remember I want to say 3 are 3 and half is illegal with butterfly and switch blades.

 

[BotanyBoy]

A revolver needs to be cocked and re-aimed before each shot, and carries a limited number of bullets.

There are only two reasons that people favor semi-automatic pistols over revolvers. They're either too lazy to cock or reload, or they're out to do some serious carnage. Fuck them both.

Fucking......IGNORANUS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLk1v5bSFPw

^^ check the fresh stink on your derp.

 

[Ishmael]

Did you just compare the shooting to mischief?

Seriously? We aren't talking about egging someone's house on halloween, we are talking about the ability to protect our children when they attend school.

The same thing just happened in China except the assailant only had a knife and while the number of injured is almost the same, no one was killed.

Look up the word moron.

Ishmael

 

[Sean]

Look up the word moron.

Ishmael

moron. n. see Ishmael.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean]

IGNORANUS

LOL. Irony.

 

[islandman]

He is a total dumb fuck when it comes to firearms.

Yet you, who claim a vast knowledge on the subject, can't formulate a way to keep them out of the hands of those who would want to harm.

Idiot, to thy own self be true.

 

[zipman]

Look up the word moron.

Ishmael

You're the moron who used the term mischief.

What kind of mischeif were you referring to when talking about an assault weapons ban. Give us some examples.

Come on Ish, enlighten us as to what you meant.

 

[koalabear]

A revolver needs to be cocked and re-aimed before each shot, and carries a limited number of bullets.

There are only two reasons that people favor semi-automatic pistols over revolvers. They're either too lazy to cock or reload, or they're out to do some serious carnage. Fuck them both.

So do semi autos, plus you do not have to cock a double action revolver each time you shoot it. I need one of those automatic aiming devices you speak of, yellow-neck.