Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumObama backs Feinstein bid to reinstate assault-weapons ban
Source: Reuters
WASHINGTON | Tue Dec 18, 2012 1:21pm EST
(Reuters) - President Barack Obama supports U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein's effort to craft legislation to reinstate an assault-weapons ban and would also back any law to close a loophole in gun-show sales, the White House said on Tuesday.
White House spokesman Jay Carney offered some of the first specifics on how Obama intends to make good on his promise to address gun violence in the aftermath of a shooting rampage at a Connecticut elementary school that killed 26 people, including 20 children.
"It's clear that as a nation we haven't done enough to address the scourge of gun violence," Carney told reporters. He reiterated that Obama "wants to move in the coming weeks."
(Reporting by Matt Spetalnick)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/18/us-usa-shooting-connecticut-obama-idUSBRE8BH10W20121218
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)The previous AWB was a dismal failure. Introducing it again will just repeat the failure at at faster rate since the gun industry already knows how to work the system and already has the machining to do it.
Banning the cosmetic features of a gun is just stupid and useless. If you want to ban semi-auto carbines, then ban semi-auto carbines. The shape of the gun has no impact on the functionality of the gun.
jpak
(41,758 posts)yup
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)ellisonz
(27,711 posts)spin
(17,493 posts)just as they did before the first ban. On a news program last night a talking head stated that in the year before the first AWB was approved a 10 year supply of assault style rifles sold out.
Also you can bet that the companies that makes magazines for firearms will have to work 24/7 to keep up for the demand for magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)spin
(17,493 posts)ellisonz
(27,711 posts)Oh a mass shooting, they might take away my precious, more GUNS! GUNS! GUNS! GUNS! GUNS!
Clames
(2,038 posts)...flat out TOLD this would happen. It's going to be months before any legislation even gets close to the President's desk and in those months hundreds of thousands of extra firearms will be "grandfathered" in.
Kaleva
(36,318 posts)My guess is you won't.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Kaleva
(36,318 posts)"Another example is the Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban, where firearms prohibitions were imposed on those convicted of misdemeanor domestic-violence offenses and on subjects of restraining orders (which do not require criminal conviction). These individuals can now be sentenced to up to ten years in a federal prison for possession of a firearm, regardless of whether the weapon was legally possessed when the law was passed."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I doubt this idea would fly though.
Kaleva
(36,318 posts)I was thinking of the people who owned automatic weapons before the NFA of 1934 was passed. My guess is that they were not exempt from either turning in their weapons or from registering them just because they owned them before the law was passed.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)given the price and lack of practicality of Thompsons. In pre minimum wage US, turning money into noise was not on anyones list of things to do. IIRC, Auto Ordnance was almost near bankruptcy because of the few security companies and police departments could afford them. I remember reading that after WWI, Colt's civilian sales of the BAR were literally zero.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)People still have them today.
Kaleva
(36,318 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)spin
(17,493 posts)as they are almost guaranteed to out perform the stock market in the long run.
ellisonz
(27,711 posts)tortoise1956
(671 posts)but I've had an AR-15 for about 7 years now. I bought it to use in long distance shooting competitions, but life happened and I never got around to competing. Things have changed...maybe I can get back to this.
I would accept registration of these weapons. I would even accept licensing, as long as the fee isn't made prohibitive ($1,000/year, for example), since this would serve to reduce ownership of these weapons to those who can afford them. Outright banning of the entire class is not a good answer, in my opinion. However, that's just my opinion. Whatever the law is, I will follow it.
As for the original assault weapons ban, there were a myriad of problems with that legislation. It should be held up as example of a bad law. For example, it didn't actually ban high-cap magazines, since it only applied to new manufacture of magazines. It only addressed cosmetic issues, not tactical capabilities.
If they're going to try it again, they need to start over from scratch. They also need to be careful how it's done so that they don't suffer the same backlash dealt in 1994, when control of Congress changed parties.
spin
(17,493 posts)Last edited Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:12 PM - Edit history (1)
and I don't have the money to invest in buying several.
I amy buy one if I move to a more rural environment but I probably will decide to use a lever action rifle for hog hunting.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... my only problem is that Bushmaster and Armalite can't keep up with demand. But, at least this stimulus program will actually add some jobs.