National ‘assault weapon’ ban coming Thursday (Today)

[jakerz]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog...-national-assault-weapon-ban-coming-thursday/

Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s office confirmed that she will be introducing in the Senate Thursday a new version of the so-called assault weapon ban. A spokesman said the full text will be released at a press conference on Thursday.
The California Democrat intends to expand on the ban that expired in 2004, by including handguns and shotguns, in addition to rifles. She would decrease from two to one the number of cosmetic features on a gun to have it be considered an “assault weapon.” This means that if a gun has just one item like a pistol grip or bayonet lug, then it is illegal. Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed into law the same ban in New York last week.
Furthermore, instead of grandfathering in current firearms, she would create a national gun registry for the government to track lawful gun owners. Magazines would again be limited to 10 rounds.
The Clinton-era bill was not renewed by Congress after the Federal Bureau of Investigation and law enforcement agencies reported that it was ineffective in reducing crime.
President Obama said that a top priority is to get “an assault weapons ban that is meaningful” passed this year.
A summary of Mrs. Feinstein’s legislation is below.
Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of: 120 specifically-named firearms; certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics; and semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.
Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by: Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test; eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test; and banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans.
Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by: Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment; exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes; and exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons.
Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include: Background check of owner and any transferee; type and serial number of the firearm; positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint; certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration.
Emily Miller is senior editor of the opinion pages for The Washington Times. Her "Emily Gets Her Gun" series on the District's gun laws won the 2012 Clark Mollenhoff Award for Investigative Reporting from the Institute on Political Journalism. Click here to follow her on Twitter and Facebook.


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog...ult-weapon-ban-coming-thursday/#ixzz2IucdoMuH
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

 

[grizzly97]

This is some BS!!! Hey Feinstein and others wanting to pass this, :finger:

 

[toehanus]

Did I read that correctly? Grandfathered ebr's would have to be registered under the NFA? Talk about going for the throat. If that's the case I really doubt this has any chance at passing.

@toehanus

 

[sanjuro893]

I've already sent e-mails and calls today. Let's squash this like a cockroach and make it clear that any further legislation will be squashed the same way.

 

[tulsamal]

Those of you that actually get interviewed by the media about stuff like this... I've seen people talk on the news about a "new AWB." And they usually say something like, "It will close some of the loopholes of the previous one." (Got to love how everything you don't like is actually a "loophole.") And they will include some type of paragraph about how "Existing weapons will be grandfathered in." But somehow the media never, never, never says one word about how Feinstein's bill actually says you can't sell them, you can't transfer them. About how these newly "grandfathered" weapons legally only belong to one person. (And there's that registered weapon issue again.) When that one person dies... nobody else is allowed to own it.

You would _think_ the media would be capable of realizing what a vast increase of gov't intrusion this represents. How this would be a confiscation of private property without compensation. A guy has $10,000 worth of "military style semi-autos." Until the bill passes. Now the gov't says they aren't actually "worth anything." He can't sell them. He can't transfer them to his son. When he dies, the bill says they have to be turned into the gov't to be destroyed. In what universe could anybody call that "fair?"

So if somebody sticks a microphone in your face or turns on a camera... please point that out to them!

Gregg

 

[okiebryan]

That's just it, the media won't read the bill. They only read the "summary" as put out by the author of the bill. DiFi SAYS she's protecting the rights of existing gun owners, so why would we possibly have any reason to object to this clearly reasonable and common sense measure to prevent gun violence?

 

[n2sooners]

Don't think it has a chance. Many of those living in districts that aren't 100% safe (like Feinstein's is) will remember 1994 and avoid this bill like the plague.

 

[jakerz]

Don't think it has a chance. Many of those living in districts that aren't 100% safe (like Feinstein's is) will remember 1994 and avoid this bill like the plague.

Plus the fact that most of those (repubs) that did vote for it, lost their jobs.

 

[BIG_MIKE2005]

This lady should be classified as mentally unfit for office. They wanna talk about actually looking into mental issues they need to study a few of these Liberals too cause their brains don't function normally.

 

[10Seconds]

I wish I agreed with your optomism here but I dont. This has become too big an issue to let it die in committee. Some version of it will get brought to a vote. If its a watered down version and is not fiercely opposed it will likely pass. I think they probably have enough votes now to pass universal background checks and probably mag capacity limits. Do not be overconfident here - Act and oppose it.