Bill text HERE.
As you’d expect, Feinstein’s “Assault Weapons Ban of 2021” is a mess. The only good not-quite-revolution-inducing part is that everything owned — “assault weapons” and normal capacity magazines (i.e.- more than ten rounds) is grandfathered; you can keep them.
Feinstein’s press release includes the usual drivel.
“Assault weapons are designed for a single purpose – to kill as many people as possible in as short an amount of time as possible.”
Really? Taking a quick look at her abomination, I see this.
‘‘(4) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to—
10 ‘‘(A) the importation for, manufacture for, sale
11 to, transfer to, or possession by the United States
12 or a department or agency of the United States or
13 a State or a department, agency, or political subdivi-
14 sion of a State, or a sale or transfer to or possession
15 by a qualified law enforcement officer employed by
16 the United States or a department or agency of the
17 United States or a State or a department, agency,
18 or political subdivision of a State, for purposes of
19 law enforcement (whether on or off duty), or a sale
20 or transfer to or possession by a campus law en-
21 forcement officer for purposes of law enforcement
22 (whether on or off duty);
So law enforcement needs the ability “to kill as many people as possible in as short an amount of time as possible”? I feel threatened.
I’m not going to fisk the bill line by line. If you can read this, you can read the bill. Anyone who lived through the ’94 AWB will find it fairly familiar, but updated for firearm models that are new since then, or more common. But the definitions are interesting.
‘(36) The term ‘semiautomatic assault weapon’
22 means any of the following, regardless of country of manu-
23 facture or caliber of ammunition accepted:‘‘(A) A semiautomatic rifle that—
‘‘(i) has the capacity to utilize a magazine
that is not a fixed magazine; and
‘‘(ii) does have any 1 of the following:
2 ‘‘(I) A pistol grip
After a few pages of banned models, we encounter some more definitions, including “pistol grip.”
‘‘(45) The term ‘pistol grip’ means a grip, a thumb-
14 hole stock or Thordsen-type grip or stock, or any other
15 characteristic that can function as a grip.
I’ll repeat that: any other characteristic that can function as a grip.
Looks like a Feinstein pistol grip, Elmer. Good thing I don’t see an external magazine.
Not to worry we have Mitch and his GOP guys and gals to protect us and if they can’t at least we have all those “conservatives” the GOP has put on the supreme court.
Sleeping well at night does not seem to be part of that recipe to me.
You put in quotes a “statement” that you would have everyone believe Feinstein made herself, and its a friggin lie. She didn’t say that did she?
Hard to believe anything I read here now after being Trumped by your report.
Well, you could have clicked the provided link and read it for yourself, to see that, yes, that statement is in the press release. As I said.
But clicking, reading, and comprehending would be too much like work for you.
When the legislature makes gun designs harder to hold and unfomfortable, they force guns to be more unsafe for the users, which is not what is needed. In fact, most law makers don’t know half of what they should know about guns in order to discuss making gun laws and show some sort of sembelence of knowledge on the subject. Some think that AR 15’s are military weapons. They call them an “assault” weapons. If I beat someone to death with a frozen Salmon, does that make it an Assault Fish?
You can commit an assault with a pillow. I live in MA. and we have the great dishonor of having some of the most uneducated about guns lawmakers in the nation. Some actually think a 20 round magazine actually makes a rifle a “full auto” weapon. Even worse, here in Ma. I doubt that 1/4 of our law makers could pass the same background check we gun owners have to pass. To many drunk drivers, pot heads, doemstic assaults, petty thiefs and bar room brawlers back in their younger days to pass the test now. They should not even be allowed to be politicians.
I often think of the woman in Maine, a veteran who had to shoot a armed home invader while holding her baby. The guy was armed and shot her too. If she wasn’t armed and trained, she would be dead now. Thats what the lawmakers would want apparently because they want to disarm the law abiding, licensed, trained and background checked people with their laws while unable to come up with a single law that has ANY effect on criminals and nut jobs who still can get guns with zero laws obeyed.
Odd, that in my re-reading of the Bill of Rights, I failed to find in the Second Amendment any phrase that limits or defines the type of Arms that Citizens may Keep and Bear. What does that weird phrase “shall not be infringed” mean? (Sarcasm) Most interesting was that no such concept of “grandfathering” or “you may keep them” was ever uttered by any Founding Father concerning God given Rights, merely enumerated by Men by specifically stating what government CANNOT do… So, this proposal is inherently null and void, and would require Free People to give up their Right voluntarily. Tyranny is a slow death, Rebellion to Tyranny is the duty of all of us who are true Sons of Liberty and love the Republic we share.
Don’t underestimate Joe Nobody!