Assault weapons ban dropped from Senate bill

[Little Star]

Source: NBC News

A ban on assault weapons won't be included in major gun legislation set to take shape this week -- all but guaranteeing it won't pass Congress.

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a onetime ally of the National Rifle Association, informed California Sen. Dianne Feinstein on Monday that the proposal to ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines won't be included in a broad package of new gun laws that's taking shape this week and will be considered on the Senate floor in April.

"People say well, are you disappointed? Obviously I'm disappointed," Feinstein told reporters Tuesday. Feinstein has worked on gun violence issues for decades.

“The enemies on this are very powerful. I've known that all my life,” she said.


Read more: http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/19/17373761-assault-weapons-ban-dropped-from-senate-bill?lite

---

I can't believe this!

[MinneapolisMatt]

1. Not surprised.

Sadly.

[Recursion]

2. It never was what supporters thought it was

If it actually banned assault weapons, that would be one thing. Requiring their grips and muzzles to be shaped differently wasn't worth wasting any time on, but it still managed to derail our party's response to Newtown, unfortunately.

[Trunk Monkey]

3. I'm confused

A ban on assault weapons won't be included in major gun legislation set to take shape this week -- all but guaranteeing it won't pass Congress.

As I read this the author is saying that because the AWB was dropped from the bill the bill will very likely not pass the House of representatives.

Is that correct?

[Paul E Ester]

10. There is a gun control bill and the AWB

they're saying the gun control bill would not pass if the AWB was a part of it. They made the AWB an amendment to the gun control bill. That means the AWB will likely be dropped in any negotiations over the other components of the gun control bill.

They still have some new laws like universal background checks for all transactions in the gun control bill.

[Trunk Monkey]

55. That makes more sense

Although I suspect that Universal Background checks (AKA registration) was the goal all along.

which is not to say Feinstein wouldn't have taken an AWB if she could have got it.

[bowens43]

4. thr gun nut lobby strikes again

unfucking believable....

[judesedit]

5. 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 Vote in the primarys. Get rid of these parasites

[slackmaster]

13. There is no way Feinstein can be primaried out. She's very well entrenched. She'll be in the...

...Senate until she decides she's had enough.

[xxqqqzme]

40. She was just

re-elected in '12. She better not run again in '18. She had no business running in '12. She will be 80 on June 22!

On the day she introduced the assault weapons bill, she voted to support Reid and not change senate rules. The assault weapons bill introduction was theatre. Nothing else.

[slackmaster]

45. About two weeks ago she described the quest for an AW ban as her "life's mission."

People who think they are on some kind of divine mission don't give up easily.

[Enrique]

66. Reid, not Feinstein

if someone would be primaried over this, it would be Reid.

[slackmaster]

68. I think Reid's decision to shed the poison pill will help ensure that he doesn't get primaried

He also made it a lot more likely that some kind of bill will pass.

Not everyone in our party is of the same mind on this issue.

[davidpdx]

110. I was thinking the same thing

And the same with Boxer as well. Both were fence sitters on the filibuster reform.

[hack89]

21. Alaska, Montana, Arkansas, South Dakota, New Mexico, Virginia, Louisiana

All Democratic Senate incumbents up for reelection in 2014. All Conservative pro-gun states.

Don't you think holding on to the Senate in 2014 would be a good thing?

[Aquavit]

103. Really?

Will you be delivering such a thoughtful eulogy at the next victim of gun violence's funeral?

[hack89]

115. Just pointing out the politcal reality that gun control faces

it does not have widespread support in America - there are many states where a majority of the population opposes it.

You can rail against that fact all you want but until you convince all of America that you are right then you will continue to fail.

[maxsolomon]

170. i hate to agree with Hack89 of all people

but DC politics, and the Senate (as an entity) in particular, really doesn't care about massacre victims no matter what age.

or the poor.

or justice.

or the planet.

etc. ad nauseum.

[jpak]

6. Gun nuts win - let the bodies hit the floor

yup

[Nihil]

75. You think they care?

They'll just celebrate their "freedom" from oppressive monarchies across the sea
and wash the blood of the innocents into the gutter as being merely "the price
that has to be paid".

Sick bastards.

[SecularMotion]

7. We have a better chance of getting Assault Weapons Bans passed at the state level right now.

I am disappointed that we didn't get votes on the record to find out who opposes the ban.

[hack89]

22. You haven't been paying attention

Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota all decided to NOT bring AWBs up for votes.

[primavera]

100. Which is telling...

... given that a substantial majority (56% to 44%) of the country favors an assault weapon ban.

[hack89]

114. Why do you think that support is evenly distributed? nt

[AtheistCrusader]

41. Depends on the state. No thanks here in WA.

Of course, nothing new, that bill comes up for discussion every stinking year.

[red dog 1]

8. Too bad Dianne Feinstein isn't Senate Majority Leader

Unlike Harry Reid, she has no love for the NRA; and she would have at least pushed for a Senate vote and made Senate Repubs go on the record as opposing both the assault weapons ban and the proposal to ban high capacity magazines.

Now the Senate Repubs are "off the hook".....thanks Harry.

[BumRushDaShow]

9. Show the pictures of the bullet-riddled bodies of the children in a hearing. n/t

[roxy1234]

18. When everyother strategy fails

Use appeal to emotion and brow beat anyone against you as being in favor of seeing children die. Those pictures of bullet riddles bodies can be created with just about any auto pistol and what happens when someone uses a pistol in the next school massacre(VT shooting)? Would u also suggest we ban pistols?

[SunSeeker]

48. A 22 revolver will not blow the limbs off a child the way a spray from an AR-15 does (and did).

Those weren't just "bullet riddled bodies." Those kids were dismembered, decapitated by the high-velocity bullets exploding out of that AR-15. And if you don't have emotion about that, you have a swinging brick for a heart and IMO are not rational.

[Trunk Monkey]

56. Where does your information come from?

I've seen people shot w/ .223 cal rounds and they are not the nuclear warheads you seem to think they are.

[SunSeeker]

65. Seriously? You deny multiple rounds from an AR-15 can blow a KID's limbs off?

Have you seen a tiny 6 year old kid shot up by an AR-15?

I get my information from the parents of Newtown victims, like the Pozners who wanted an open casket funeral so everyone could see how their son's mouth and jaw were shot off.

Google "open casket Sandy Hook."

[Trunk Monkey]

118. I'm not saying is isn't (barely) possible

If you aim at one spot and fire multiple rounds

I'm saying that your average .223 FMJ round won't do that.

Have you not heard the complaints that came from Iraq and Afghanistan that the .223 round is inadequate for combat operations? Are you not aware that the Army started fielding the M14 again to designated shooters to over come the issue?

I'm saying that there is all kinds of ballistic data that disproves your emotion based arguement.

[AtheistCrusader]

140. It's not impossible.

It's not exactly normal either. There was a ten year old shot center mass, near his heart by the DC Sniper. He's alive today. But yes, while the bullet lacks much in the way of mass, it is very high velocity, and can have a dramatic wound, especially on a smaller person, like a child. Doubly so at very close range.

Frankly, there's no bullet/firearm combo mild enough to be fired at a child without devastating consequences. Dismembered or not, dead is dead. And that's not something that anyone ever wants to see, let alone with a child.

Worrying about whether the wound is gruesome in appearance or not seems, ... odd to me. In that vein, be glad he didn't use an AR-10.

[SunSeeker]

162. Thank you for completing the trifecta of gungeoneer arguments.

1. Deny the truth.
2. Admit the truth and deny you ever denied the truth.
3. Say the truth does not matter.

(in that order)

[AtheistCrusader]

165. Um, bullshit.

It is highly unusual for any dismemberment to occur. If I had to speculate on a method, if you pressed the weapon up against someone, the expanding gasses would ALSO have a wound, and that could remove chunks. This would happen with any rifle, pretty much.

It is actually highly unusual for a .223 round to rip off a limb or major structural component of the body.

Shit, they've done this on TV on Mythbusters, trying to show the Hollywood 'blow back' flying bodies thing was complete cinema world fabrication. They hung a pig carcass and blasted away at it with all manner of firearms, including .223. It just fell over. No dramatic fragmentation of the carcass.

[SunSeeker]

166. I see, going back to step 1.

Rinse, lather, repeat.

[AtheistCrusader]

167. Mischaracterize all you want, you are factually wrong.

I would be willing to view the pictures from the crime scene at Sandy Hook. I suspect it's not exactly as characterized.

I would also be willing for that data to go completely public. If we're going to have a public policy debate on guns colored with this sort of stuff, let's have it out in the open, not via hearsay.

Edit: You realize the expanding gasses thing is real, and that more than a few people have been killed by BLANK rounds for this precise reason, right?

[premium]

168. Heres one right here.

http://www.nytimes.com/1984/10/20/obituaries/jon-erik-hexum-26-is-dead-tv-actor-shot-in-an-accident.html

LOS ANGELES, Oct. 19— Jon- Erik Hexum, a television actor who inadvertently shot himself in the head with a blank-loaded pistol, has died, officials said today.

He was 26 years old.

The hospital where Mr. Hexum had been treated since the accident Oct. 12 on the set of the ''Cover Up'' television series notified the Los Angeles County coroner's office on Thursday night that the actor was brain dead, a coroner's investigator, Phil Campbell, said.

He is survived by his mother, Gretha, of Los Angeles, and a brother, Gunnar, of Boston.

Blank guns can be just as dangerous when not used properly.

[SpartanDem]

58. Let's talk bout rational

this separates the AR-15 traditional rifles it's ammo capacity. You ban the AR-15 but countless people hunt with guns that use the same exact ammo. What's rational allowing a guns that functionally the same, but since it look like a traditional rifle it's still legal. The AWB was a sound good/feel good bill. I'm far more scared of the millions of private guns sales that help flood guns on to streets of cities like my hometown of Detroit.

As he sold four handguns in a South Side parking lot last year, Levaine Tanksley boasted to his customer that there were plenty more illicit weapons available, investigators say.

"Twenty-five more in four hours," Tanksley told his customer, who was secretly working for law enforcement and recording the conversation. "Give me $5,000 and you can put your order in then. I'll get you whatever, give me a list."

As Tanksley, who police say has ties to a Chicago street gang, made his sales pitch, David Lewisbey was stocking up on more weapons at a gun show 40 miles away in Crown Point, Ind., one of several trips he made across the state border and back in little more than a day, according to federal authorities. Five hours later, Lewisbey, an unlikely gun trafficker then enrolled in college, was back in Chicago as Tanksley made good on his promise and sold the informant nine more guns, authorities allege.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-02-17/news/ct-met-guns-gangs-20130217_1_levaine-tanksley-gun-laws-gun-trafficker

[SunSeeker]

67. The ability to clip in huge capacity is key, along with the high velocity of the bullets.

That is what makes AR-15s and guns like it so deadly. IMO, anything that can take an extended magazine should be banned. So if that is what you are saying, then I agree with you.

And yes, the gun show loophole is a travesty. Looks like that is about the only thing that will get addressed by this legislation via universal background checks---if the NRA does not kill that too.

[Clames]

70. High velocity?

That would pretty much define the vast majority of rifle bullets. In fact, most popular hunting cartridges are as fast if not faster. 7mm Rem Mag, .270 Winchester, .270 WSM, .300 WSM...the list is extensive. That's been the whole goal for the last 5 decades or so, lighter, faster, flatter shooting rifle cartridges. The ammo the AR-15 uses is nothing special in that regard. In fact, that has been the evolution since the dawn of long firearms.

[SunSeeker]

72. As long as the rifle doesn't take extended mags, I'm fine with it. It's the combo.

Assault rifles combine the higher velocity of long rifles with the high magazine capacity capability. They are made for combat, not our streets, nor for hunting. And yes, there are a lot of rifles that do that don't look like assault rifles or aren't called assault rifles. They should be banned too.

And don't give me that bullshit about the ammo that AR-15s use is "nothing special." The .223 it shoots is twice the length of a regular 22 mm bullet used in a classic revolver. Compound that with a 30-round or 100-round mag and you have a mass killing machine. It is INSANE that anything like that is legal for civilians.

Can't wait to see what you will mansplain to me next...

[Clames]

83. They should be banned too.

Well they won't.

And don't give me that bullshit about the ammo that AR-15s use is "nothing special." The .223 it shoots is twice the length of a regular 22 mm bullet used in a classic revolver.

Well you can just keep your head buried. I'm sure you mean 22LR since 22mm would be almost a modern cannon round. Comparing the my .223 Rem round to the .30-30 Winchester and .30-06 rounds next to it I can most assuredly say it ain't special. Willful ignorance to say otherwise.

Can't wait to see what you will mansplain to me next...

[SunSeeker]

84. So predictable. I knew you wouldn't be able to help yourself. nt

[Clames]

87. Incorrigible. n/t

[Bay Boy]

120. I'll jump in here...

...I'm guessing you meant .22 caliber and not a 22 mm bullet.
But I can't tell where you were going with: " The .223 it shoots is twice the length of a regular 22 mm bullet used in a classic revolver"

[Recursion]

128. The bullets are the same length. You may be thinking of the cartridge

The actual bullets are pretty much the same size.

[DustyJoe]

130. high velocity

When a human body is shot at close range like 10 feet or so

there isn't a difference whether it is a

830 feet per second 220 gr .45 calibre
1080 feet per second .22 calibre long rifle
or
2750 feet per second .223 calibre

at that distance the weight and size of the projectile determine more than velocity the damage inflicted.

there are .17 pellet rifles capable of exiting the barrel in excess of 1000 feet per second that use no gunpowder at all.

[AtheistCrusader]

142. You are mischaracterizing the .223 Remington/5.56 NATO cartridge.

It is NOT 'so deadly'. A lot of our troops are pretty pissed at it's military cousin for lacking stopping power. It was desirable as a military round for two reasons: cold war doctrine, and portability. .223 is a lot lighter and smaller than .308, the previous battle rifle cartridge. Stepping down to a cartridge somewhere between a battle rifle and a sub machine gun was desirable to increase the amount of ammo the soldier could carry. Studies showed volume of fire was preferred over penetrating power, so more ammo of the lighter weight was deemed superior to less ammo of greater power. Second, killing on the battlefield, in cold war era war fighting doctrine is not as valuable as wounding. Killing an enemy soldier is ok, one guy out of the fight. Wounding an enemy soldier is better, because now you've taken out one soldier plus one or more of his comrades attempting to care for him. .223 is LESS deadly than .308.

And you can see this in deer hunting regulations. The .223 is not lawful for hunting deer in most states, not because it is grossly deadly, but because it is too small and light. It won't reliably put down a 250lb deer without needless suffering. It is not damaging ENOUGH. The minimum caliber for hunting deer in my state is .240 for this reason. Bigger, heavier bullet, bigger wound, more energy on impact. More likely to penetrate and do enough damage to cleanly kill the deer. The troops are generally unfavorable to the round nowadays, because the enemy is more or less a 250lb deer that might be wearing body armor, and is shooting back at you.

Yes, you aim it at a kid, devastating results. Same is true of any long rifle. Hunters using .223 are more likely to be using it against animals that are, frankly, more kid sized, like coyote, and feral hogs. Only in a handful of states, with VERY specialized ammo, are people using these rifles lawfully against deer.

Your comment about accepting external magazines applies to practically every semi-auto rifle made after oh.. about 1940 or so, so that's a huge battle. Not a trivial legislative issue. These rifles are very much in common use today, nationwide, by millions of people for entirely lawful purposes.

[Trunk Monkey]

119. So, a gangbanger selling firearms illegally

would fiollow a law requiring background checks for all sales?

And some how equates to me willing my 30/30 hunting rifle to my son?

[SpartanDem]

121. The gangbanger bought the arms legally at first

this guy was going to guns shows Indiana, buying and reselling in Chicago. Read the article.

[Recursion]

129. What you're describing is illegal

So, no, the gun wasn't bought legally at first.

[Trunk Monkey]

131. Then, no, he wasn't buying the firearms legally

Buying a firearm with the intent to resell it across state lines is a federal crime.

Intent counts.

That's no different that a person with an MMJ card reselling his weed it's still a crime and he still bought it with the intent to resell it illegaly.

Do you think this guy would have a problem paying a straw buyer to make the purchases? (Which would still be illegal BTW).

I think this problem needs to be fixed first

According to the NRA-ILA there were 17 million background checks conducted last year out of that number 79,000 were denied and of that number 62 (that's not a typo it's not 62 thousand it's sixty two) were prosecuted and only thirteen were convicted.

Before we worry about private sales shouldn't we devote resources to investigating those 79 thousand people that were denied?

No joke I was with a friend who was buying a gun a few years ago when the BGC came back "DENIED" on him. The gun shop owner handed him his money and he walked out of the store and as far as the law was concerned that was the end of it.

Now my friend went home got a lawyer, appealed the denial and found out that he was denied over a petty misdemeanor from 20 years ago. It cost him some money and some time but he got the denial reversed and the "crime" expunged from his record.

But during the whole time the ATF never once followed up on the guy, the local PD was never informed nothing was done to see why this guy was trying to buy a gun in the first place.

Don't you think that might be a problem that needs fixing?

[AtheistCrusader]

144. Without universal background checks, the straw purchaser can 'move' a lot more guns

before getting caught if he or she is purchasing from unwitting, well-meaning private sellers.

[Trunk Monkey]

151. A straw purchaser (by Definition) can PASS a background check

Do try to keep up.

[AtheistCrusader]

153. NO FUCKING SHIT.

When guns are recovered from crimes, you can go get the 4473 on file with the FFL at the point of sale and see who bought it. Interview the buyer. Pull that buyer's records from that and other FFL and see if there is a pattern.

It's work because certain laws prevent a central database (the 1986 GOPA) as it would amount to de facto registration, which is prohibited.

'Do try and keep up'.

[Trunk Monkey]

155. Alternatively, you can just plea out on the gun charge

which is what normally happens.

When was the last time you actually heard of a felon in possesion actually doing time for it?

[AtheistCrusader]

157. Yesterday.

http://stillwater.patch.com/articles/felon-sentenced-to-15-years-in-prison-for-wielding-gun-during-burglary

[Trunk Monkey]

159. And that is EXACTLY what needs to happen.

But let's go back to my original point

79 Thousand denials last year

62 prosecutions

Do you see a problem here?

What's the point of doing more background checks (which would also institute a defacto waiting period because the system can't seem to keep up with the number of checks done on retail sales now) if you aren't following up on the ones you're doing now?

[AtheistCrusader]

160. The two issues are separate.

I also advocate funding and a mandate to follow-up on the NICS denials. But again, this has NOTHING TO DO with locating the straw purchasers. Without a paper trail of 4473's, the police have little to nothing to figure out where the gun passed from a lawful owner, to a straw purchaser for distribution to an ineligible recipient.

These are separate issues.

The paper trail is important, because so far, brute force police work has revealed that very few buyers can be responsible for the movement of large numbers of guns.

[Trunk Monkey]

161. Ok that makes sense NT

[AtheistCrusader]

143. Background checks can choke off one avenue by which those guns GET to the 'gangbanger'

in the first place. This eliminates or will help eliminate straw purchasers that turn around and re-sell to criminal elements. Including friends and family, the #1 source of guns used in crimes by prohibited felons.

Couple that with safe storage requirements to cut down on theft from lawful gun owners (and reporting requirements for theft so they may be recovered faster) and you can reasonably expect some of the firearms in unlawful users hands on the street to dry up.

[Trunk Monkey]

152. Again, a straw purchaser (by definition) can PASS a background check. NT

[AtheistCrusader]

154. Thanks for your meaningless and uninteresting response.

[SpartanDem]

164. With background checks there is a record

you that remember that shooting firefighters in upstate New York? The reason they were able catch the straw purchasers is because their was a record.



WEBSTER, N.Y. — William Spengler raised no alarms in prison for 17 years and for more than a decade afterward. Well-spoken, well-behaved and intelligent, his demeanor was praised by four straight parole boards that nevertheless denied him parole, worried that bludgeoning his 92-year-old grandmother with a hammer showed a violent streak that could explode again.
After his sentence was up in 1996, he stayed out of trouble until 2010, police said Friday. That's when Spengler went to a sporting goods store with a neighbor's daughter, picked out a Bushmaster semiautomatic rifle and a shotgun and had her buy the guns that the convicted felon couldn't legally possess. On Monday, he used the weapons to ambush firefighters lured to a blaze he set at his house in upstate Webster, killing two people and wounding three others before killing himself.

On Friday, state and federal authorities charged the woman who bought the guns, 24-year-old Dawn Nguyen, with lying on a form that said she would be the owner of the guns she bought for Spengler

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/straw-buyer-guns-webster-shooting-arrested-article-1.1229180#ixzz2O6Ed0VkG

[Trunk Monkey]

169. I get that but I suspect it will take several years to see a dramatic change

as there are hundreds of thousands of guns in this country that are several owners removed from the orginal purchaser.

[slackmaster]

11. It was poision for the more reasonable and broadly accepted parts of the bill

Leaving it in would have resulted in nothing getting passed. With the silly AW ban out, there is a good chance we can get some progress on background checks on private sales of used firearms, improved reporting of mental health disqualifications, and other things that actually might make a difference. Banning the most popular sporting firearms is not good politics.

The 10-year AWB that expired in 2004 had no measurable effect on public safety, and neither has its expiration.

[SunSeeker]

82. Not good politics? Most Americans support an AWB. AR killings DOUBLED after the last one expired.

Some 51 percent support a ban on semi-automatic handguns.
http://www.standard.net/stories/2013/01/14/poll-most-americans-support-assault-weapons-ban-armed-guards

And the 10-year AWB that expired in 2004 absolutely had an effect. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence examined the impact of the Assault Weapons Ban in its 2004 report, On Target: The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Act. Examining 1.4 million guns involved in crime, "in the five-year period before enactment of the Federal Assault Weapons Act (1990-1994), assault weapons named in the Act constituted 4.82% of the crime gun traces ATF conducted nationwide. Since the law’s enactment, however, these assault weapons have made up only 1.61% of the guns ATF has traced to crime."
http://www.bradycenter.org/xshare/pdf/reports/on_target.pdf

According to a 2004 study from the University of Pennsylvania, the number of people killed in mass shootings did go down generally during the years that the ban was in effect. The study found that gun crimes involving assault weapons declined by as much as 72 percent in the localities examined after the ban went into effect. The number of mass shootings per year has doubled since the ban expired in 2004.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/newtown-connecticut-shootings-assault-weapons-ban-work/story?id=18000724&page=2

[hack89]

88. No - they did not double

murders by rifle (which include all rifles) have been dropping steadily for two decades.

In 2010 there were 350 killed by rifles of all kinds.

[SunSeeker]

90. Links? Deaths by ASSAULT Rifles did double.

Yes, murders by hunting rifles may have been dropping. But not by ARs.

[Llewlladdwr]

95. How could you possibly freaking know that?

Please provide a link to YOUR info.

As far as I know the FBI doesn't track what type of rifle is used in a murder, just that it was a rifle.

[Clames]

98. Correct. The FBI UCR Table 20 only lists Rifles as a single category.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

[SunSeeker]

102. I read the news...

According to a 2004 study from the University of Pennsylvania, the number of people killed in mass shootings did go down generally during the years that the ban was in effect. The study found that gun crimes involving assault weapons declined by as much as 72 percent in the localities examined after the ban went into effect. The number of mass shootings per year has doubled since the ban expired in 2004.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/newtown-connecticut-shootings-assault-weapons-ban-work/story?id=18000724&page=2

[Recursion]

124. The majority of mass shootings use normal handguns

Just like non-mass shootings.

So mass shootings and the AWB don't really have much to do with each other, except politically.

[hack89]

113. How about you providing a link that shows they doubled?

back up your claim.

[slackmaster]

136. You are spouting nonsense. Figures to discriminate crimes with "assault" vs. "hunting" rifles...

...don't exist.

[hack89]

89. The rifle used at Sandy Hook was legal under the old AWB

it was also legal under CTs current AWB. So it was not an assault weapon.

So be careful when bandying around stats about the effect of the AWB - it didn't actually ban the sale of military style semiautomatic rifles.

[SunSeeker]

91. It IS an Assault Weapon, and would be illegal under Feinstein's AWB.

Way to obfuscate the issue, but that is what you do here. And the fact that it is not illegal under CTs current AWB is all the more reason to have passed Feinstein's AWB. I am not sure if this particular model was around in 1994, which may be why you are suggesting it would not have been banned under the old AWB. You cite no links. But even the Bushmaster was not listed under the 1994 AWB as you claim, if the AWB was renewed in 2004, new models could have been added, and it certainly would have been listed in Feinstein's current version. But alas, you and your blood-soaked buddies at the NRA had their way, and the AWB was not extended.

[Clames]

99. Wouldn't have been banned anyway.

Grandfather clause.

[SunSeeker]

101. It would have banned future AR purchases, like the last AWB.

It's a start. It is ironic that you pick at it because it does not go far enough.

[Clames]

105. Didn't ban those either.

Plenty were available new, used ones could still be bought and sold at will, plenty of parts available to build new ones and modify existing ones. Could buy a pre-ban receiver, pre-ban threaded barrel, pre-ban 30rd magazine, pre-ban folding stock and build a pre-ban AR-15....after the ban went into effect.

[SunSeeker]

107. Enough with the lies.

It did ban new sales of ARs, as would Feinstein's bill. Yes, stuff sold before the ban would not be confiscated. And of course gun nuts would attempt to violate the letter and spirit of the law. Duh. Again, ironic that you pick at this law because it does not go far enough.

This is getting really boring. Sorry, but I have a life and I need to get some sleep. Buh bye.

[Clames]

109. Wrong again.

New AR's were still being produced and sold that passed the two-feature test (oh noes, no bayonet lug). That's exactly how the law was written... I guess it is boring to keep getting schooled on what actually happened vs what you imagined. Letter and spirit of a poorly written law...

[NickB79]

145. I sold a ton of new AR's during the ban

I worked in the gun department of a major chain sporting goods store to pay for college from 1999-2001 in Minnesota. We routinely stocked AR-15 rifles, primarily from Olympic Arms and Bushmaster.

After the 1994 AWB, the manufacturers simply removed the banned features (bayonet lug, flash hider, collapsible stock, etc), changed the names and called them "semi-automatic target rifles" or "semi-automatic varmint rifles".

[AtheistCrusader]

147. He's not lying. You could buy pre-ban weapons, new in box, that were produced prior to the ban.

There were warehouses full of extended magazines, still being sold in 2003, a year before the ban sunset. Which is why the Brady 'numbers' are so laughable; nobody stopped selling these weapons during the ban, they simply became more expensive due to something like 'collector value' being added by the law. (artificial scarcity)

1994 CAWB banned the manufacture/importation, not sale. If it was made before the day the law went into effect, it could be sold.

[hack89]

112. You brought up the old AWB

I am just pointing out that it did not do what you thought it did.

[hack89]

117. It was not banned in 1994 because it only has one feature

that was used to identify a rifle as an assault weapon. The 1994 AWB banned guns with two features. The CT AWB was modeled under the 1994 AWB - that is why the rifle was legal in CT.

If Feinstein's AWB passed, the manufacturer would be required to modify the pistol grip to make it legal. Same rate of fire, same ability to use large capacity magazines. Let me show you in pictures:

This gun is specifically called out in the legislation as being illegal under the AWB:




This gun is specifically called out in the legislation as being legal under the AWB:



They are both Ruger Mini-14s

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14TacticalRifle/models.html

What is going to happen when gun manufacturers simply make their rifles look like the bottom rifle? There will be no more "assault rifles ". Will we be any safer?

[AtheistCrusader]

146. That rifle was perfectly legal for sale in 1995 after the CAWB was enacted.

The CAWB didn't just ban by name, but also by feature set. The weapon in question passed both tests.

[BainsBane]

12. It's time for Harry Reid to step down as Senate Majority Leader

I've had it with him. I understand that being from Nevada, he's not able to support some of the President's proposals. That is all the more reason he shouldn't be majority leader. We need someone who won't water down progressive action.

[hack89]

24. His fellow Senators get to choose their leader

they seem happy to have him as leader.

Btw - why do you think there are many progressive Dems in the Senate? Look at the Senate Dems up for reelection in 2014 alone - Alaska, Montana, Arkansas, South Dakota, New Mexico, Virginia, Louisiana. All Conservative pro-gun states.

There is a reason Harry Reid is the Senate Leader.

[Little Star]

175. I agree! They need to vote him out as leader....

we need someone from a really blue state as leader who doesn't have to worry about their own ass.

[PADemD]

14. Call your Senators

I just did.

[slackmaster]

15. They don't listen to me.

[blackspade]

16. I believe it.

The rot that is our political system is really starting to show.

We have got to get the money out of politics.

[Peter cotton]

17. Good news.

[LiberalLovinLug]

19. But...but....but..

ah just done spent all my children's college fund stocking up on more of those guns they said the Socialist Kenyan was going to take from me.

[Progressive dog]

20. A minority of gun worshipers still controls the government

"Support for specific proposals also has remained steady. Background checks on gun sales are favored by 83 percent of Americans, and bans on assault style weapons and high-capacity clips by 56 and 53 percent respectively; all three figures are comparable to those from mid-January polls." Huffington post/Pew Poll (can't get link to show)

[CanonRay]

23. Profiles in Cowardice

A new book about the Congress.

[shagsak]

25. The threat of legislation may have backfired

A friend of mine picked up an AR-15 this weekend just because of the "threat" of a ban - the Bass Pro Shop sold out within minutes of receiving their stock - which tells me people are stocking up. God knows how many of these weapons will flood the market just because of the "threat" of legislation, sit on someone's shelf, and then get stolen and used in heinous crimes.

[Hoyt]

27. The yahoos that love such lethal weapons will always find a reason to buy them.

It's an addiction with society as the victim. Sooner or later we'll do like Australia and ban the dang things.

[slackmaster]

28. Of course it backfired. Look at the measurable results of the now-expired federal AWB:

1. Massive proliferation of weapons that weren't covered by the ban but are functionally identical - This happened DURING the 10-year ban, which coincided with rapid expansion of the World Wide Web.

2. Radicalization of gun owners.

3. No beneficial effect on public safety.

4. And now, mere discussion of a new ban results in another round of proliferation of every kind of firearm, not limited to the kinds for which a ban was proposed.

The current run on firearms and the resulting shortages of weapons and ammunition won't let up for at least two years, and what happens then will depend on the results of the 2014 election.

The zealots have shot themselves in the foot AGAIN.

[Mojorabbit]

64. +1000 nt

[Eleanors38]

138. Irony is lost in this thread. Prohibition causes that.

[SidneyR]

26. Shithole Country

Corrupt to the core. Americans need to get over their "we're the greatest democracy in the world." Sack of lies.

[Duval]

29. Reid has blown it again!

He also had a chance to do something about the fillibuster rules.

[premium]

34. In this case, the filibuster rule wouldn't have mattered,

he's saying that there aren't even 40 votes for the AWB.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Tuesday he will not include a renewal of the federal assault weapons ban in a Senate gun control bill because it could not win even 40 votes on the Senate floor.

“Right now her amendment using the most optimistic numbers has less than 40 votes," Reid told reporters on Tuesday. "That’s not 60. I have to get something on the floor so we can have votes on that issue and the other issues we talked about."

[Purveyor]

30. Laughing at all those 'fools' that stood in line to pay outrageous prices for those AW-lookalikes.;)

[mwrguy]

31. Apparently Reid does not work for the American people

but for the NRA.

[forestpath]

32. The gun humpers win again.

[SylviaD]

33. Another case of "OFF THE TABLE", right?

damn it I am so upset.

these weapons need to be banned.

I'm not sure where we go from here. Our own leadership is too weak kneed to do what needs to be DONE

damn it

[premium]

36. Something Sen. Feinstein's AWB didn't do.

All it did was ban cosmetic features, which the firearms manufacturer's would have just redesigned and renamed.

[onehandle]

35. Expected. As the country blueifies and populates, UK and Japan type laws will be come to be.

Patience.

[SylviaD]

38. WRONG. The gun nuts breed like rabbits. Check state by state birth rates. n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

43. We shot this bill down in Washington state.

Doesn't get much blue-er than around here.

[Eleanors38]

139. Are folks "breeding like rabbits" up there?

[AtheistCrusader]

141. Nope. That's part of why, at least in some places in the country, that 'breeding' comment is invalid

This is not a precisely left-right issue. See plenty of Obama/Biden bumper stickers at the gun show parking lots.

Might be interesting to do a survey on those grounds, actually.

[Botany]

37. 20 dead babies in Connecticut not enough to do something?

thanx a lot Harry for all your good work

[SylviaD]

39. He and the rest of our "leadership" has a lot to answer for. n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

44. Actually, this increases the liklihood the bill will pass.

Then we get universal background checks and some other items.

The background checks is a big fucking deal, please don't write it off.

[Ken Burch]

54. Anytime we get half-a-bill, somebody calls it a "big fucking deal".

There's little difference between half and nothing on most legislation

[slackmaster]

57. In this case the alternative would have been no bill at all

The AW ban was a poison pill. (Unintentionally.)

[AtheistCrusader]

59. By itself, the background checks are a big deal.

The AWB Christmas list was BS from the start, and people are loathe to repeat the 1994 debacle on both sides of the political fence. They are separate issues. If you think the AWB is a big deal, submit it all by itself. It'll be shot down in flames, just like last year, and the year before, etc.


Getting through universal background checks is a HISTORIC win all by itself.

[Ken Burch]

60. Assuming THAT doesn't get watered-down to something halfway-or-less as well.

Just getting "a gun bill" in name through that ended up not doing much of anythign would be worse than nothing.

The Civil Rights Act of 1957, which didn't even stop lynchings, was a good example of that.

[AtheistCrusader]

61. True, there are a lot of ways that happens.

The current NICS reporting burden is an example. It's a carrot or no carrot approach. No stick.

States that meet certain reporting requirements for NICS disqualifications for criminal behavior, restraining orders, and mental health disqualifications, get access to a set aside pile of federal money for law enforcement stuff, things like that. States that don't, don't.

Needs a stick. Too many states don't meet the requirements (hence the non-reporting of Cho, at Virginia Tech, all the mechanisms were there to prevent him from buying a gun, but the reporting to the federal NICS DB didn't happen).

"meet the requirements, or we withhold transportation funding' or something like that.

[Botany]

69. It will pass only if no republican does the "pocket filibuster" thing

.... and then 60 votes are needed for cloture.

I agree the universal background checks are a big deal but we have to do
something about military grade assault weapons and the large capacity
magazines too.

Harry Reid giving in on the filibuster for a handshake deal w/ Mitch McConnell
stinks on ice.

[premium]

71. Sen. Feinstein herself admitted that she has barely 40 votes for an AWB,

that would mean several Dems have told her that they won't vote for it.
Given that, how do you see it passing?

[Botany]

73. If 20 babies and 6 teachers being cut up by an assault rifle does not get ....

.... both republicans and democrats to act then I just fucking give up.

The AR 15 is a civilian version of the M-16 and the M-16 was modeled after
the AK-47 which was developed by Mikhail Kalashnikov for use in WW II in the
brutal conditions like the battle of Stalingrad. The bushmaster AR 15 shoots
a .223 round that has little recoil but wicked power .... 3,200 ft/sec and it is
made to tumble after it hits somebody.

All the Senators and Congresspersons who are against doing something against
these killing machines should be made to look at the pictures of those dead babies.

Australia had a problem and then they banned assault weapons and they haven't
had a mass killing since ...... after we let the assault weapons ban expire in the
US we have a huge uptick in mass killings using those guns.

As for answers ..... I just don't know but I am sick of the status quo and all those
people who yell about their 2nd amendment rights but at the same time idiots
w/guns are walking all over our 1st amendment right to be able to peacefully
assemble ..... along with the preamble to the decleration of independence ..
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

BTW I have hunted and owned guns for years but I am sickened by our failure
to act to stop gun violence in America.

sorry to rant

[premium]

74. I well know what the M-16 can do to human flesh.

Witnessed it plenty in Vietnam.
It's ok to rant, sometimes it's needed and deserved.

[Botany]

79. I was just a kid but I saw what a V.C. or NVA grenade could do to ...

.... a childhood friend's older brother. He was KIA in August of 1969
and our neighborhood never felt the same ..... I hope having a
combat vet who was an enlisted man, Chuck Hagel, as Sec. of Defense
will keep us out stupid wars.

thank you for your service. Sorry to rant but as a father the Newton, CT
killings really hit me hard. The weekend after those shootings I was
supposed to go deer hunting and I just couldn't take my shotgun out
of the closet let alone load it and shoot it.

all the best,
botany

[sweetapogee]

122. i'm struggling

to see where the average 2nd amendment enthusiast tramples on your 1st amendment right to assembly.

[Botany]

125. how about the right to assemble @ a:

public school
a movie theater
christmas shopping @ a mall
a college
workplace
church

all of those places have been the locations of mass public killings ..... and BTW a real
reading of the 2nd amendment does not give the right to every tom, dick, and harry to
own a gun ....... because they are by no means any part of "a well regulated militia"

[sweetapogee]

134. if you believe

if you really believe that individuals exercising their second amendment rights are violating your 1st amendment rights then why haven't you sought recourse in the courts?

[Botany]

135. Go sell that b.s. someplace else

Last edited Thu Mar 21, 2013, 09:17 AM - Edit history (1)

This mother had every right to believe that her baby was gonna
learn songs about Santa, along with reading and math and that
her child was going to peacefully assemble with other kids in
public school to do just that anything else is sophistry and straw
man arguments all designed "to put the Connecticut problem
behind us."*







* NRA quote (not an exact quote but close enough)

[sweetapogee]

171. murder is b.s.

I agree with that. The question that I'm asking you is if you feel that you are being denied your right to assemble in public in accordance with the provisions of the 1st amendment because of the existence 2nd amendment, then why have you not petitioned the courts based on a denial of your 1st amendment rights? That is the question. You are the one that said that your 1st amendment rights are denied because of the 2nd amendment. I think we can all agree that murder is b.s.

[Botany]

172. because this is not about me

n/t

[Recursion]

123. Australia has had two mass killings since they banned assault weapons

One shooting and one mass arson killing.

[Botany]

126. The ex P.M. of Australia would disagree with you ..... John Howard

In the 18 years before the 1996 reforms, Australia suffered 13 gun massacres — each with more than four victims — causing a total of 102 deaths. There has not been a single massacre in that category since 1996.

Few Australians would deny that their country is safer today as a consequence of gun control.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/opinion/australia-banned-assault-weapons-america-can-too.html

[Recursion]

127. The fact remains there have been two mass killings. Meanwhile, the US has had a *greater* reduction

in gun and non-gun violence over the same time period.

[Botany]

132. the US has had a *greater* reduction in gun and non-gun violence

tell that to these kids



to deny that the proliferation of guns does not lead to proliferation of gun
deaths in America is just sophistry

[Recursion]

133. OMG! You posted pictures of dead children! Suddenly facts are meaningless!

Sigh.

I repeat: the US has had a greater reduction in gun and non-gun violence over the same period.

I understand the media freaks out over mass shootings, but we're talking about the absolute least common thing in all of violence here. Thousands of people have been shot, nearly all of them by handguns, since Sandy Hook. I doubt you could find any of their pictures to post.

[AtheistCrusader]

150. You tried to use numbers, and when you found the numbers don't support your position

you whip out dead kids? Not very smooth.

[Botany]

156. Those dead kids deserve to be seen and if it makes the gun lovers uncomfortable so what

The more guns a population has and the loser the gun laws that are there
then the more gun deaths that happen in that area.

The #s, the stats, and the studies that support that position have been done
and are rock solid.

If after seeing 20 babies cut to ribbons by an AR 15 (AR stands for assault rifle)
and you and other politicians refuse to do anything because of love of the gun
then I wonder when something is ever going to be done ..... how many more
times will things like Newtown happen and nothing will get done?

[AtheistCrusader]

158. Good grief you can't get anything right. AR stands for ARmalite.

Every firearm they designed, whether an 'assault rifle' or not, starts with the model naming scheme AR.

Edit: Meet the M4 Survival Rifle, also known as the AR-5. Does it look like an ASSAULT RIFLE to you?:

[premium]

163. The AR stands for ARmalite.

It's a common mistake to think that the AR stands for Assault Rifle.
Just like the AK in AK-47 stands for the name of the Soviet designer, Anatoly Kalashnikov.

[horsedoc]

42. I totally agree with Michael Moore...

show the bodies of those poor children to everyone in this country, then let the NRA come out and defend their position. Sickening! I honestly want to move out of this country and once the wife finshes her PhD I am taking our well educated (overpriced) butts out of here.

[bullwinkle428]

46. Bottom line - Newtown changed NOTHING.

This was my nausea-inducing prediction in the hours and days that followed that massacre, and I've never felt more disgusted about being right. Well, maybe not never, on the 10th anniversary of the Iraq invasion, but that's another discussion.

Rachel always brings this sunny optimism to her show about "Things are different this time!", but I'm afraid I can't share her positivity.

[slackmaster]

47. I think your conclusion is premature. The demise of the AW ban means a better chance that something

...more meaningful such as background checks on private sales will pass.

[Little Star]

52. I hope your wrong. n/t

[Ken Burch]

49. In other words, there's now nothing in the bill that matters.

Without the assault weapons ban, the rest of the bill is too trivial to notice-there's no good reason to even bother passing it.

It's never worth settling for LESS than half a loaf.

[slackmaster]

50. Background checks on private sales of used firearms would be the biggest gun control win in decades

Surely you can see the importance of that, Ken. It matters a lot more than a cosmetic feature ban, and it's something that actually has a chance of being passed.

[premium]

51. What?

You don't think UBC and strengthened straw purchase penalties isn't worth it?
Those 2 alone will do more to keep guns out of the hands of those that are not allowed to have them then Sen. Feinstein's AWB.

[Recursion]

62. You have that backwards: the AWB was pointless

Instead of the "Bushmaster" we would have a "Shrubmaster" with a modified grip. Awesome.

Background checks for all transfers matter, and Feinstein's windmill-tilting was endangering that.

[Ken Burch]

63. OK...if nothing else AT ALL is changed in the bill.

You would agree that what's left is non-negotiable, right? That nothing short of what remains could be worth anything?

People do have good reasons to be suspicious of "compromises" after the last few years, when most of the compromises were little different than not getting anything at all.

[SpartanDem]

53. The AWB was useless junk

Nothing in the AWB slow the numbers of guns flooding into cities like Chicago or Detroit at least universal backgrounds will slow it down.


As he sold four handguns in a South Side parking lot last year, Levaine Tanksley boasted to his customer that there were plenty more illicit weapons available, investigators say.

"Twenty-five more in four hours," Tanksley told his customer, who was secretly working for law enforcement and recording the conversation. "Give me $5,000 and you can put your order in then. I'll get you whatever, give me a list."

As Tanksley, who police say has ties to a Chicago street gang, made his sales pitch, David Lewisbey was stocking up on more weapons at a gun show 40 miles away in Crown Point, Ind., one of several trips he made across the state border and back in little more than a day, according to federal authorities. Five hours later, Lewisbey, an unlikely gun trafficker then enrolled in college, was back in Chicago as Tanksley made good on his promise and sold the informant nine more guns, authorities allege.

A federal indictment charges the two with illegally selling 43 firearms to the government informant in just under 26 hours, a volume made possible by gun shows and less restrictive state laws in Indiana, by far the No. 1 source of out-of-state guns used in crimes in Cook County. Private gun sales in Indiana don't require background checks, a waiting period or even a record of the transaction.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-02-17/news/ct-met-guns-gangs-20130217_1_levaine-tanksley-gun-laws-gun-trafficker

[SunSeeker]

78. The AWB was not useless junk.

Of course, many gungeoneers here will repeat the NRA talking point that the proposed AWB was just directed at cosmetics. Just like the NRA says universal background checks (which would help in your Detroit scenario) is useless. But if it was more comprehensive, they would not have approved of it either. It there were holes in it, the response should have been to fill the holes, not discard the whole AWB bill. The last federal AWB did make a difference.

According to a 2004 study from the University of Pennsylvania, the number of people killed in mass shootings did go down generally during the years that the ban was in effect. The study found that gun crimes involving assault weapons declined by as much as 72 percent in the localities examined after the ban went into effect. The number of mass shootings per year has doubled since the ban expired in 2004.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/newtown-connecticut-shootings-assault-weapons-ban-work/story?id=18000724&page=2

The NRA is not your friend, SpartanDem. Don't repeat their lies.

[Clames]

85. Well it was.

As the only things it really regulated were cosmetic features which is obvious to anyone that had read the law. Even the VPC stated as much.

As for the study...

"We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence," the study concluded. "And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence."

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/jerrylee/research/aw_ban.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm



NRA had nothing to do with these studies btw.

[SunSeeker]

92. Bullshit.

You are mixing gun violence in general with death by ARs. That does not refute the studies I cite.

And thanks to the NRA, we have a dearth of studies because they made sure that the NHS can't do studies on gun deaths. If the stats were in the NRA's favor, they would not have done that.

[Clames]

96. Those are specifically addressed in the studies I've linked.

You'd know that if you could be bothered to read them. NHS can do plenty of studies, studies have been conducted and are still being conducted by a variety of researchers. The studies just continue to be contradictory and inconclusive...which is exactly what the CDC found in 2004 when it combed through dozens of them.

[SunSeeker]

104. Nothing in your links denies that deaths by ARs doubled since the AWB expired.

None of your links even addresses that. One is dated 2003; the other is dated 2004. The AWB expired in 2004.

[Clames]

106. You have provided absolutely no proof to back that spurious claim.

My links where intended to address a different gap in your limited knowledge of this subject. The FBI UCR makes zero distinctions on the types of rifles used in homicides and those deaths have held steady before, during, and after the AWB. As far as I'm concerned your assertion that deaths by AR's have doubled since the AWB expired is a lie until you can prove otherwise.

[AtheistCrusader]

148. That 10 year ban didn't stop the sale of weapons like the one used in CT.

If you don't believe me, I'll show you the contents of my gun safe, and a couple receipts sometime.

[Pterodactyl]

76. Not surprised that it didn't proceed.

If Democratic senators voted for it, they'd be vulnerable in reelection. And it would never pass the House anyway. They probably figured it wasn't worth the risk.

[elias7]

77. FUCK GUNS!!!

And the morons who support them.

[Nika]

80. It is a shame that too many in the House and Senate lack the political courage to take on the gun

lobby.

If they care so little about the epidemic of gun violence and our kid's safety, there are a too many of the wrong people holding offince in Congress and should be voted out.

[Little Star]

81. Bingo

[apocalypsehow]

94. +1,000. n/t.

[fascisthunter]

86. gotta let mentally unstable whackjobs have their toys

...or else.

[SunSeeker]

93. Exactly, otherwise, what would they wear?

[Llewlladdwr]

97. I'm no fan of Harry Reid.

But it's always good to see a man do the right thing.

[jsr]

108. I knew it.

[davidpdx]

111. I can unfortunately

In my opinion the cards were dealt once the filibuster reform was killed. The "spineless 7" who refused to back the measure should be ashamed of themselves. Feinstein got exactly what she deserved, the defeat of her bill. Maybe next time she'll get her ass off the fence and help do something. She has no one to blame but herself.

[madville]

173. The AWB was dead with or without the filibuster reform

They don't even have a simple majority at this point, what I read yesterday said it barely had 40 potential YEA votes.

[sendero]

116. Don't worry.....

..... an intrepid DUer is going to discover language in our legal framework (constitution and the like) that proves that guns are illegal and the thousands of judges who have made rulings based on this language we all wrong and soon guns will be all but illegal!

Yes Sheldon, that was sarcasm.

[NickB79]

149. Called it when the first calls for a new AWB were proposed

In the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting. I had coworkers going nuts because of the fear of a new gun ban. They kept telling me how I had to stockpile more guns and ammo, and thought I was crazy for not going with them to the stores. Meh.

Democrats in the Senate would be throwing away their careers for nothing if they voted in favor of this, because even if it passed the Senate it would die in the House.

Democrats would lose seats in the 2014 and 2016 elections specifically due to this bill if it were voted on as originally written.

[Ter]

174. Let the military give up their assault weapons first

How can Obama support an AWB when he supports drones and the NDAA?