Assault Weapons Ban of 2013

[cabu]

Anybody read that paper: Best of Feinstein ?

They want to ban nearly everthing.

And for the rest, they want to built up a national database of 'who own's what'.

First they name the semi's "Assault Weapon" und then, they take it from you.
Secound they will name Pistols and Revolvers "Assault Weapon" und then, they take it from you.
Third they will name rifles "Assault Weapon" und then, they take it from you.

And then you figure out, you pull the plow on others properties, just to get enough to feed yourself, but not the family...

Here they start:

The term ‘semiautomatic assault weapon’ means any of the following, regardless of country of manufacture or caliber of ammunition accepted:
‘‘(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any 1 of the following:
‘‘(i) A pistol grip.
‘‘(ii) A forward grip.
‘‘(iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
‘‘(iv) A grenade launcher or rocket launcher.
‘‘(v) A barrel shroud.
‘‘(vi) A threaded barrel.
‘‘(B) A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed
magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

They ban by optics !!
Adjustable stocks are banned, different sized people can't adjust the rifle to their need's.
A protection is not allowed around the barrel but below.
A silencer or muzzel break shall not be screwed on, but is allowed to grip on.

And then they list up, that all AK's, all AR's and nearly all others are banned.
That kind was used in Newtown by a mentally ill person, but in the statistics they are not relevant.


In view of the economic problem in the U.S. and Europe, you'd think so, that some governments belief, that it will become risky, for rulers and their Godfathers, uh lobby (the 1%), that for their safty it would be better to disarm the 99%. You never know if the sovereign itself could just start to defend against the 1%. We have the right: eg 2nd Amentmend or GG Art.20 (Germany)

Btw: Which group is behind Mrs Feinstein?

The problem is to take care about family, neighbors and community. People running around killing others, have a problem. We need to get the reasons of that problems fixed. But this is too hugh and complex for the most of these ban-people and would involve their own fail in that task.


In Germany we have also a party (the green party) which want to ban private weapons. They want to tax every piece, they want to ban one kind after another, they want weapons only for the government.
And we all know what government do, if there is no resistance in the country:

"Firearm's belongs only in the hands of state-authority.
Remarkable, how less some idealists learned from our history..."

 

[skeets]

If people were only smart enough to learn from the past, we wouldnt have to relive it so often

 

[bosshogg]

Any ban on gun ownership is illegal and contradictory to the Second Amendment. The government does not hold the power to ban guns in this country regardless of how they want to. I will not participate or register and weapons to the government as it is an infringement on my rights.

 

[DJG]

So we should do nothing? Really?

Do you think your private arsenal is going to be enough if the National Guard or ATF comes after you? Ask the folks at Waco.

Do you have your surface-to-air missile inventory yet? How you going to knock those drones down?

Please, a little regulation of military-grade assault weapons doesn't constitute the "slipper slope" to slavery.

I've got better things to do with my Kubota than dig a bomb shelter, climb in and await the apocalypse.

 

[DanDan]

Please, a little regulation of military-grade assault weapons doesn't constitute the "slipper slope" to slavery.

Replace the words "military-grade assault weapons" with "internal combustion diesel engine", and maybe you see the problem in a different light.

Protect the children!
Save the planet!

The anti-freedom agenda knows no bounds.

 

[Aardvark]

Call me naive, but why don't you guys just get rid of the governments that steadily dismantle your Constitution and remove your rights? If there were enough people there who could see beyond the media brainwash they could surely vote in a better set of politicians. Personally I have never felt the need to own firearms, but then its a very long time since I lived in the States.

 

[TripleR]

So we should do nothing? Really?

Do you think your private arsenal is going to be enough if the National Guard or ATF comes after you? Ask the folks at Waco.

Do you have your surface-to-air missile inventory yet? How you going to knock those drones down?

Please, a little regulation of military-grade assault weapons doesn't constitute the "slipper slope" to slavery.

I've got better things to do with my Kubota than dig a bomb shelter, climb in and await the apocalypse.

I know a lot of people who own semi-automatic rifle that are black and have pistol grips, but they are not "military grade", those are capable of full auto or burst fire. My Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle looks just like any other sporting rifle, but it would be illegal. My wife's Remington 742 is no different in function than my sons' M1A or HK91, but they would illegal not so sure about hers.

I don't intend to use my firearms against the National Guard or ATF, so I don't understand that point. If we get to the point to where we have to consider the disparity of forces of our citizenry and military forces, we have all lost.

 

[bosshogg]

So we should do nothing? Really?

Do you think your private arsenal is going to be enough if the National Guard or ATF comes after you? Ask the folks at Waco.

Do you have your surface-to-air missile inventory yet? How you going to knock those drones down?

Please, a little regulation of military-grade assault weapons doesn't constitute the "slipper slope" to slavery.

I've got better things to do with my Kubota than dig a bomb shelter, climb in and await the apocalypse.

A few thousand Afghan fighters have given the US and Russian militarizes more then they could handle. Multiply that resistance by tens of thousands and you see they have a real problem on their hands. Also realize soldiers take the Constitution very seriously and swear to an oath to uphold it. They have died by the hundreds of thousands defending the Constitution and upholding liberty and I highly doubt will turn against the populace because the government has become tyrannical. I welcome any advanced weapons owned by this country.

 

[DJG]

Replace the words "military-grade assault weapons" with "internal combustion diesel engine", and maybe you see the problem in a different light.

Protect the children!
Save the planet!

The anti-freedom agenda knows no bounds.

Good point. I do see it in another light. Let's just have the same regulations for gun ownership as we do for car ownership. Licensing, regulation, testing, like that.
Drinking & driving causes lots of accidental deaths too, but instead of doing nothing, efforts were made to reduce it. And voila, it's down and we're all safer.
I have no love for government intrusion into private lives. I'm just saying there are things that can be done rather than just walking away and throwing up our hands.
Be well.

 

[DJG]

I know a lot of people who own semi-automatic rifle that are black and have pistol grips, but they are not "military grade", those are capable of full auto or burst fire. My Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle looks just like any other sporting rifle, but it would be illegal. My wife's Remington 742 is no different in function than my sons' M1A or HK91, but they would illegal not so sure about hers.

I don't intend to use my firearms against the National Guard or ATF, so I don't understand that point. If we get to the point to where we have to consider the disparity of forces of our citizenry and military forces, we have all lost.

All your points are good ones. So, again, should we do nothing about the 10,000 dead from gun violence every year? I'll bet you could come up with some reasonable limits.
At least it's worth discussing, eh?
Not that we're going to solve it by ourselves, but I'm not waiting for the NRA to solve it either.
And yeah, let's hope the government never turns its sights on you or me.

 

[DJG]

A few thousand Afghan fighters have given the US and Russian militarizes more then they could handle. Multiply that resistance by tens of thousands and you see they have a real problem on their hands. Also realize soldiers take the Constitution very seriously and swear to an oath to uphold it. They have died by the hundreds of thousands defending the Constitution and upholding liberty and I highly doubt will turn against the populace because the government has become tyrannical. I welcome any advanced weapons owned by this country.

Yes, the Afghan fighters did do a good job ousting invaders. Been doing it for at least hundreds of years. It's the place armies go to die, from what I hear.

When you talk about the Constitution, it says other things than "bearing arms". Way before it brings up gun ownership, it talks about the duty of the government to provide for the "general welfare". That's both in the Preamble and elsewhere in the Constitution.
I figure "general welfare" includes trying to reduce from 10,000/year the number of gun deaths in our country.
We've reduced the number of people killed in auto accidents with seat belts, and reduced the number of kids smoking, and reduced the number of drunk drivers.
So why can't we do something to rein in gun violence?
I'm sure there are steps that can be taken, but not if people are totally unwilling to talk about limits. I mean, there's already limits. You aren't allowed to own an operating tank, or missile launcher, etc.
It may be complicated, but I think we should do something.

Me, I'm going to play with my tractor and keep the trigger locks on.
Warm Regards

 

[TripleR]

All your points are good ones. So, again, should we do nothing about the 10,000 dead from gun violence every year? I'll bet you could come up with some reasonable limits.
At least it's worth discussing, eh?
Not that we're going to solve it by ourselves, but I'm not waiting for the NRA to solve it either.
And yeah, let's hope the government never turns its sights on you or me.

No I don't advocate doing nothing, a good start would be to start arresting everyone who lies on the Form 4473 rather than just turning them away, no harm no foul. But I am not sure even this would have a statistically significant effect. Look at the places that have some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation and firearms homicides are still high.

I know it is a well worn statement, but guns are not the problem and assault style weapons are used in a statistically small number of crimes. I worked in criminal justice for a lot of years and put a lot of people in prison and I can't see where I really accomplished much. Controlling human behavior is a whole lot more difficult than one would think.

 

[fast*st]

All your points are good ones. So, again, should we do nothing about the 10,000 dead from gun violence every year? I'll bet you could come up with some reasonable limits.
At least it's worth discussing, eh?
Not that we're going to solve it by ourselves, but I'm not waiting for the NRA to solve it either.
And yeah, let's hope the government never turns its sights on you or me.

Well, gun violence is thrown up because guns are bad! Guess owning guns makes me prone to going on a nutter!
drunk driving kills 13,000 every year and other alcohol related disease brings that total to over 40,000.

Murders involving guns has dropped every year since the early 80's yet ownership has climbed.

This might well have halted the murder of children in CT; it would have assisted a mother in getting her non-minor child into the mental health care system.

Connecticut Senate Bill 452 was proposed in February 2012 “to enhance the care and treatment of persons with psychiatric disabilities in both inpatient and outpatient settings.” But the bill was defeated in March 2012, with opposition calling it “outrageously discriminatory.” The ACLU said the bill would “infringe on patients’ privacy rights by expanding [the circle of] who can medicate individuals without their consent.”

The ones who need to act are the judges who let violent criminals roam free because they promise not to do it again.

And then lets give those that need help access to the help they need.

 

[Lil Foot]

I have always said that the ACLU has done more harm to this country than all our enemies combined.
Whenever possible, deer & elk hit on the highways in this state used to be recovered, processed, and turned over to homeless shelters & food banks to feed the needy.... ACLU sued the state because the practice was "discrimination" against those needy people.... forcing them to eat meat that was not FDA inspected. They won, & now we have laws preventing the practice. Absolutely right, much better to let them go hungry. (see sad obituary)

You know, I wouldn't mind a little "non-FDA inspected" meat every now & then.

 

[cabu]

All your points are good ones. So, again, should we do nothing about the 10,000 dead from gun violence every year?

Maybe some info from another country:

In Germany we have ~300 homicides per year with a firearm.

We have had in the last 10 years ~140 homicides with legal firearms.
And half of them were by government officials!

So, from all hunters and sportsmen there are 4-6 who murder ~7 people.
Most of these kills are in family and in a mood where a knife or brick would be also taken.

So, we come down to 2-4 'civil' murders per year with legal firearms.

And they still want to ban firearms for private ownership.

Our body count of 2-4 is, in my point of view, a normal risk to live in a big group of different people.

Most school-massacre in Germany have been done by illegal firearms or mental ill person where the administration has failed!


What does our gun law say:

No weapon to someone with a criminal record, mental disease.

Only if the person has a need, e.g. hunting or sport.

Hunting license is taking classes with test, several month and $3000.
Sportsmen, member of a shooting club for one year with documented trainings (~18).

Hunter maximum of 2 handguns.
Sportsman 2 handguns but up to 6 if he can proof to be good enough to shout in the top league. And 3 Semis and up to 5 (top League)

Normal rifle no limitation. (But 200 is to much...)
It's only allowed to buy max of 2 firearms in a term 6 month.

Weapons need to be looked up in a classified safe or room.
It's not allowed to carry them around with no need. Need's are hunting, driving to the range or gunsmith.

No shooting on your own ground unless you have a proofed shooting range/room or you are in the hunting club that has the right to hunt in that area.

The Germans are 82Mio people, with 10Mio legal private firearms and 3-4Mio hunters/sportsmen.
Illegal firearms are estimated with 20-30Mio!!

Maybe you bring the 10.000 down to a list, who kill and why. Maybe you will figure out that private legal firearms are not the problem...

 

[gssixgun]

Good point. I do see it in another light. Let's just have the same regulations for gun ownership as we do for car ownership. Licensing, regulation, testing, like that.
Drinking & driving causes lots of accidental deaths too, but instead of doing nothing, efforts were made to reduce it. And voila, it's down and we're all safer.

Drunk Driving is a fantastic point, however it is a fantastic point for the pro-gun side..

Facts: Alcohol was Banned in the past, 18th Amendment 1919, it didn't work, 21st Amendment 1933

So what really brought about the reduction of Drunk Driving ??? it wasn't changing the laws on Alcohol... It was stepping up enforcement of the laws that had been on the books for years.. They arrested those that were breaking the law, and prosecuted them mercilessly..

So comparing that to gun laws, you have to enforce the existing laws, and you have to prosecute those that break those laws..
The Guns nor the Alcohol are at fault, it is the Criminal abusing them that needs to be punished not the Law Abiding citizen that is using them legally

With every new law you have to ask, Is it going to leave Boot prints on the Constitution ?? Will it punish the Criminal or is it only going to effect the Law abiding Citizen???


ps: Feinstein is all about herself and the headlines,, proof ??? Google it yourself "Feinstein, Richard Rameriz, the Night Stalker" have fun reading about how she put the headlines ahead of your safety..

 

[DanDan]

Good point. I do see it in another light. Let's just have the same regulations for gun ownership as we do for car ownership. Licensing, regulation, testing, like that.
Drinking & driving causes lots of accidental deaths too, but instead of doing nothing, efforts were made to reduce it. And voila, it's down and we're all safer.
I have no love for government intrusion into private lives. I'm just saying there are things that can be done rather than just walking away and throwing up our hands.
Be well.

Accidental deaths due to motor vehicles occur 33k/yr; accidental poisonings the same, 33k/yr. Fatal falls appear to cause another 26k/yr.
That's a combined total of accidental deaths occurring at more than 8 times the rate of homicides involving firearms, and homicide is already illegal.
Throw your hands up over that.



If we are going to be worried about tragic loss of life, then let's be frank and honest about it.

 

[Aardvark]

I have always said that the ACLU has done more harm to this country than all our enemies combined.
Whenever possible, deer & elk hit on the highways in this state used to be recovered, processed, and turned over to homeless shelters & food banks to feed the needy.... ACLU sued the state because the practice was "discrimination" against those needy people.... forcing them to eat meat that was not FDA inspected. They won, & now we have laws preventing the practice. Absolutely right, much better to let them go hungry. (see sad obituary)

You know, I wouldn't mind a little "non-FDA inspected" meat every now & then.

I find that seriously stupid. In effect the ACLU would rather have those needy folks eat only FDA inspected meat which has been reared using hormones and potentially poisonous GM animal feeds than venison that had been living on natural non-chemically messed with food all its life. How sad.

 

[bosshogg]

All your points are good ones. So, again, should we do nothing about the 10,000 dead from gun violence every year? I'll bet you could come up with some reasonable limits.
At least it's worth discussing, eh?
Not that we're going to solve it by ourselves, but I'm not waiting for the NRA to solve it either.
And yeah, let's hope the government never turns its sights on you or me.

We willingly murder over a million defenseless babies in this country every year yet I don't hear any plans to reduce those numbers.

 

[bcbull378]

Ok you got my blood boiling on this one. Think about it people murder is illeagle , drugs illeagle but the same politicians are ok with giving young mothers the right to murder( abortion ) want to infringe on our gun rights. Obummer has armed gaurds with automatic weapons gaurding his family , Barbara Fienstien has a CCW of her own plus armed gaurds. This has nothing to do with mass killings its all about control by the goverment , believe me its all about control I live in Ca and know about goverment control. Grow a set people and stand up for yourself dont cave into all the politically correct B.S. like my father said if you dont stand for something youll fall for anything. If you dont want a gun in your house fine but dont cry when some thug kicks your door in and harms or worse kills a family member, yes a cop is just a phone call away , he'll be there to fill out the report but you still have the bloody mess to deal with.


P.S. Even if one of my family members was killed by so called ( gun violence ) I would not and will not give up my guns.