Senate Democrats Introduce Assault Weapons Ban of 2019
.
Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) have introduced the “Assault Weapons Ban of 2019.”
.
“Last year we saw tens of thousands of students nationwide take to the streets to demand action to stop mass shootings and stem the epidemic of gun violence that plagues our communities. Our youngest generation has grown up with active-shooter drills, hiding under their desks—and now they’re saying enough is enough,” said Senator Dianne Feinstein. “Americans across the nation are asking Congress to reinstate the federal ban on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. If we’re going to put a stop to mass shootings and protect our children, we need to get these weapons of war off our streets.”
.
The ban would prohibit the sale, manufacture, transfer or importation of 205 rifle models by name. The Senators refer to these firearms as “military-style assault weapons.” The bill does have a grandfather clause. Current owners of these guns would be able to keep them.
.
According to Senator Feinstein's twitter, this legislation considers any rifle that uses a detachable magazine and has a pistol grip, a forward grip, a barrel shroud, a threaded barrel or a folding or telescoping stock as an “assault weapon.”
.
Feinstein clarifies her Assault Weapons Ban
.
The bill would also ban any magazine that is capable of holding more than ten rounds. The law states that the magazine ban is due to the given ability to increase the rate at which a person can continue to fire their rifle/pistol. Like the now would-be banned firearms, owners would be able to keep the magazines that they currently own.
.
“Assault weapons and high-capacity magazines are deadly and dangerous weapons of war that belong on battlefields—not our streets. They have no purpose for self-defense or hunting, and no business being in our schools, churches and malls,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal. “By passing this legislation, Congress can honor the memory of the beautiful lives cut short by military-style assault weapons in Newtown, Parkland, Las Vegas, San Bernardino and far too many other American cities. This is the year for my colleagues to turn our rhetoric into reality and finally end America’s gun violence epidemic.”
.
Part of the bill would be universal background checks on all transfers of grandfathered guns. The requirement would also apply to firearms that are gifted to family members. It would be a felony to transfer a gun without a background check, even if it is to an immediate family member.
.
However, magazines that hold more than ten rounds would not be transferable after the law would go into effect. This prohibition on the transferring of the magazines would even include giving the magazines to immediate family members. Only the current owner of the magazines at the time that the ban goes into effect would be able to own them.
.
Owners of these guns would have to keep the now-banned firearms in a secure storage container or install a trigger lock. This requirement would apply to everyone, even those who live alone and have no reason to lock their firearms.
.
The Senators also want to ban foldable and telescoping stocks. They believe that an adjustable stock's purpose is to make it easier to conceal the firearm. This point is incorrect. Shooters use adjustable stocks to find the most comfortable position to fire their guns.
.
Pistols are not immune from this bill. It would ban any pistol that weighs over 50 ounces unloaded. This measurement is a little over 3 pounds and would ban almost all pistol ARs and AKs. Other guns like the CZ Scorpion would also be prohibited.
.
The legislation would also ban stabilizing braces such as the ones sold be SB Tactical. The Senators think that by adding a brace to a pistol it turns the pistol into an “assault rifle.”
.
“She needs to appeal to her base, but the reality of it is that she doesn't even know what a stabilizing brace is,” Alex Bosco, The CEO of SB Tactical, told AmmoLand. “I would be interested to understand why prohibiting a product that allows individuals who are disabled and have limited mobility to fire a weapon more accurately should be outlawed.”
.
Thordsen's featureless stocks are also not immune from this bill. Gun owners have used these stocks to be in compliance with state laws that currently ban pistol grips on rifles such as California, New York, and Maryland.
.
Gun rights advocates point out that the “assault weapons” ban of 1994 that was in effect until 2004 was infective at stopping gun violence. The Clinton era Justice Department found that the ban had little to no impact on crime or gun deaths. Other studies have found similar results since the law expired.
.
In a statement released by Michael Hammond, legal counsel for Gun Owners of America reads:
.
“Dianne Feinstein's new unconstitutional gun ban follows in the “Feinstein tradition” of blindly attacking guns for no particular rational purpose.
.
The 1994-2004 less-repressive predecessor to the Feinstein bill was found by the Department of Justice to have been totally ineffectual. As a result, in 2013, only 39 other senators voted to support her semi-automatic ban — in a Senate controlled by Democrats. And, finally, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has just declared, as unconstitutional, California's magazine ban, which is similar to the one contained in Feinstein's bill.
.
So Feinstein's insistence of “doubling down on failure” may make her — and the loony Left — feel good. But no sane legislature is actually going to vote for her bill.”
.
Hammond points out that the magazine ban in the bill almost mirrors the prohibition that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared unconstitutional. The court case was from Feinstein's home state of California.
.
The odds that the bill will make it to the floor of the Senate are long. Republicans control the Senate, and just like Feinstein's previous bills, The Senate leadership will probably table the bill and not let it come to the floor for debate.
.
Even if this bill makes it to the floor for a vote, it would need 60 votes to prevent a filibuster. That would mean that 13 Republican would have to cross party lines which seems unlikely.
.
Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2019/01/sen...#ixzz5cKMoHzt0
.
My Thoughts:
.
Sen. Fienstein -- ever faithful to her hatred of the Second Amendment -- wants to ban commonly-owned firearms.
.
The communists in the senate don't even bother to hide their hatred of the country they live in.
.
She needs to take down her walls around the real-estate that she owns and do away with her body guards.
.
She needs to review the Federal Report on the last Assault Weapons Ban, which showed absolutely no effect on the overall crime in the US, because the vast majority of crime with firearms is done with handguns.