Sen. Dianne Feinstein To Introduce Assault Weapons Ban

[Garrett]

http://thehill.com/video/senate/273...-federal-assault-weapons-ban-in-next-congress

“It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession, not retroactively, prospectively. And it will ban the same for big clips, drums or strips of more than 10 bullets,” Feinstein said of her proposal.

Here we go. Liberals will look to use tragedy to infringe upon your rights. Be sure to write your elected officials and (respectfully) tell them how you feel.

 

[Trenkamp79]

I'm going to one up this.

1) All of our hearts go out to the families of Newtown. As an educator I can't even come up with the words.
2) Our president's memorial speech tonight. First half, great and exactly what needed to be said. Then he made it political. Anyone with half a brain could read between the lines of that speech, and that reading was I'm going after the guns.

I pray that Democratic gun owners take a stand against their party if/when the president decides to head this direction.

I hope I'm wrong, but did anyone else listening to his speech tonight take away a different point of view?

 

[LYON]

Can someone with some political knowledge explain what "not retroactively, prospectively" means? I'm thinking it is saying if you already own the gun, you'll be fine as far as possession is concerned, but future possessions won't be allowed?

 

[Daver]

Can someone with some political knowledge explain what "not retroactively, prospectively" means? I'm thinking it is saying if you already own the gun, you'll be fine as far as possession is concerned, but future possessions won't be allowed?

I interpret that comment to mean that there will soon be a law proposed to restrict the sale, going forward, of certain classes of guns but any current owners of that class will not be made to turn in guns they already have.

But that is just one man's opinion and there is really no way to know for sure what is meant by that phrase. Also, it is quite impossible to predict where "they" will be satisfied if "they" can get the momentum started and restrict gun ownership in any fashion.

 

[muddy]

I am in the same understanding as Daver, but have no idea what will be coming down the pipe.

 

[gunrunr]

Most likely very similar to the Brady bill in the 90's. Guns or magazines with certain features will no longer be allowed to be manufactured or imported but the ones already in the system will be legal (although prices will skyrocket )

After that is soaked in and "accepted" and it is found out that such a law is pointless and only affects law-abiding citizens, they will most likely attempt to take it even farther in a direction none of us even wants to think about.

 

[gunrunr]

Supplies of Assault Rifles and High Capacity Handguns are disappearing faster than I have ever seen. A very large availability of guns was readily accessible at the distributor level and now that is virtually gone. My advice for anyone who has been contemplating a purchase is to do it now or you may never get another chance. Supplies are almost gone and may never be replenished. Its going to get way worse, be prepared for a tough legislative battle that we may not win.

 

[blake]

Sen. Dianne Feinstein

Feinstein to introduce assault weapons ban bill

(CNN) – Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California said Sunday the president will soon have legislation "to lead on" in the gun control debate, announcing she will introduce a bill next month in the Senate to place a ban on assault weapons.

"We'll be prepared to go, and I hope the nation will really help," Feinstein said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

The senator said she'll introduce the bill when Congress reconvenes in January and the same legislation will also be proposed in the House of Representatives.

"We're crafting this one. It's being done with care. It'll be ready on the first day," she said, adding that she'll soon announce the House authors.

"It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation, and the possession. Not retroactively, but prospectively. It will ban the same for big clips, drums or strips of more than 10 bullets," she said. "There will be a bill."

Gun rights legislation has gained renewed attention since Friday's deadly elementary school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, that left 20 students and six adults dead.

Many lawmakers and politicians have called for stricter gun control laws at the federal level, including a revisit to the 1994 former assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 but has yet to be reinstated.

Feinstein, who helped champion the 1994 legislation, said she and her staff have looked at the initial bill and tried to "perfect it."

"We believe we have (perfected it). We exempt over 900 specific weapons that will not fall under the bill, but the purpose of this bill is to get … 'weapons of war' off the street of our cities," she said.

The senator added she believes President Barack Obama will support the legislation. As a presidential candidate in 2008, Obama said he would support such a ban, but he has been criticized for failing to work toward tighter gun control laws since taking office.

After Friday's shooting, however, the president signaled a change in policy could soon be in place.

"We're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics," Obama said in his weekly address Saturday, echoing remarks he made Friday after the tragedy.

Feinstein on Sunday praised the assault weapons ban of 1994 for surviving its entire 10-year term and predicted a successful future for her upcoming bill.

"I believe this will be sustained as well," she added. "You know, all of the things that society regulates, but we can't touch guns? That's wrong."

Many years ago I took an oath to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States of America against all enemies foreign, and Domestic! Nothing has changed in my mind! Ron Wyllie

 

[JNRBRONC]

A more rational view.

 

[AZHunter]

A more rational view.

Not the first time I've seen this and I love it every time. As a Federal employee, the Hatch Act prevents me from lobbying for or against any piece of Federal legislation (can lose my job). I ask you, Randy, and others to fight hard on my behalf to prevent this.

 

[SEIowaDeerslayer]

So if I'm reading this correctly even possessing a firearm that is capable of handling more than 10 rounds will be illegal to even own?

 

[JNRBRONC]

So if I'm reading this correctly even possessing a firearm that is capable of handling more than 10 rounds will be illegal to even own?

Not the way I read this statement:
"It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation, and the possession. Not retroactively, but prospectively. It will ban the same for big clips, drums or strips of more than 10 bullets," she said.


Looks like people will be "Grandfathered" in.

 

[SaskGuy]

What indeed is the cultural problem down there that has your gun related death toll staggeringly high for a civilized nation?

Not looking to debate the entire gun thing, just wondering if anyone has any thoughts?

 

[Daver]

What indeed is the cultural problem down there that has your gun related death toll staggeringly high for a civilized nation?

Not looking to debate the entire gun thing, just wondering if anyone has any thoughts?

Sask - IMO, there isn't a simple, neat answer to this very valid, very vexing question. But I do think you nailed it when you said "cultural problem".

To me, it isn't just the presence, or absence, of guns. To suggest or argue that it is, to me reveals that an agenda is present. I will try to provide a little more in depth thoughts of mine this evening, when I have more time to write. But I will say for now that it is a complex, multi-facted issue that there is not an easy answer for.

 

[Trenkamp79]

We are arguing about the wrong things here. Instead we should be spending our time sending emails and making phone calls to our politicians. Guns don't kill people and gun laws don't protect law abiding citizens. Lets make a statement that we are ready for this fight.

 

[Team pewp]

What indeed is the cultural problem down there that has your gun related death toll staggeringly high for a civilized nation?

Not looking to debate the entire gun thing, just wondering if anyone has any thoughts?

Look at Canada's population and population density vs. the USA. That explains a lot as to why our gun death toll is higher than you Canucks up north. More people = more crime. That being said, i definitly think we have a culture problem as well. I also think anit-depressent drugs play a role in this too. Look at the lunatics committing these mass murders. They all have one thing in common and that is they were on some sort of anti-depressents. there was a time when these events didnt happen as regularly as they do now and the USA was just as heavily armed as it is now. There was also a time when prozac, zoloft, and other anti-depressants didn't exist. Maybe i am wrong but i see a correlation there.

 

[SaskGuy]

Teampewp, I was not looking at any comparison to Canada as I realize there is a much higer population density there, but since you mentioned it let's break it down to equivalency. Most numbers I have found show the U.S at roughly 9 gun deaths per 100 000 people while Canada averages around 2 per 100 000 people. Like I said before I am not really looking into a gun law debate as I am a gun owner and although we have certain gun laws the guns that are restricted have not ever affected my own personal rights or choices anyways.

I assure you I am not looking at an argument and understand that gun legislation will not "Stop" crime, hell murder happened in my little dinky village this year with a non restricted hunting rifle. Just thought I would share a couple numbers as the higher population=more crime is obvious, what I am trying to understand is the much higher amount per capita.

I can say that I do find it a wee bit alarming that this tradgedy seems to have everyone able running out and stockpiling weapons and ammo. I personally cannot see myself feeling a whole bunch safer knowing there were suddenly that many more weapons in circulation nor would such tragedy make me feel like I needed to become more armed. I understand that guns alone do not kill people anymore than cars do and also understand that there are many people on this site that I respect much that would have very diff't views than I on the topic, that's fine. It's just a crazy time it seems where I find myself thinking maybe too much. I know you guys know very little about what happens up here as I doubt any of your news stations cover Canadian news but I see US news almost daily showing someone a victim of a senseless killing, it's crazy.

 

[JNRBRONC]

I can say that I do find it a wee bit alarming that this tragedy seems to have everyone able running out and stockpiling weapons and ammo.

Watching threads on some of the forums I follow where people are talking about how they can't find an AR to buy. Me, I didn't really want one before last Friday, my feelings haven't changed because of current events.

I know you guys know very little about what happens up here as I doubt any of your news stations cover Canadian news but I see US news almost daily showing someone a victim of a senseless killing, it's crazy.

Our media rarely reports on good news items as that "doesn't sell copy". So they sensationalize these types of stories to increase traffic on their websites. I also think that they should squelch down some of these stories in hopes it limits the copycats.

Did you hear this news story? http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html

 

[Team pewp]

Teampewp, I was not looking at any comparison to Canada as I realize there is a much higer population density there, but since you mentioned it let's break it down to equivalency. Most numbers I have found show the U.S at roughly 9 gun deaths per 100 000 people while Canada averages around 2 per 100 000 people. Like I said before I am not really looking into a gun law debate as I am a gun owner and although we have certain gun laws the guns that are restricted have not ever affected my own personal rights or choices anyways.

I assure you I am not looking at an argument and understand that gun legislation will not "Stop" crime, hell murder happened in my little dinky village this year with a non restricted hunting rifle. Just thought I would share a couple numbers as the higher population=more crime is obvious, what I am trying to understand is the much higher amount per capita.

I can say that I do find it a wee bit alarming that this tradgedy seems to have everyone able running out and stockpiling weapons and ammo. I personally cannot see myself feeling a whole bunch safer knowing there were suddenly that many more weapons in circulation nor would such tragedy make me feel like I needed to become more armed. I understand that guns alone do not kill people anymore than cars do and also understand that there are many people on this site that I respect much that would have very diff't views than I on the topic, that's fine. It's just a crazy time it seems where I find myself thinking maybe too much. I know you guys know very little about what happens up here as I doubt any of your news stations cover Canadian news but I see US news almost daily showing someone a victim of a senseless killing, it's crazy.

Just pointing out some factors as to why the US has a higher gun death rate. Like I said, population density is a key factor in this too. Take Alaska out of the equation and the US is much more densely populated(more people per square mile) than Canada.....Again, I think mental illness and the drugs used to treat it, are a big factor in why these lunatics commit these senseless acts. SaskGuy: do you know if a lot of Canadians are prescribed anti-depressants? It seems to be an epidemic in the USA and I can't help wonder if that is part of the problem. It seems like every one of these nut jobs was on some sort of anti depressant meds. I know you weren't trying to start a comparison with Canada but if Canada has not had the issues the US has had with gun violence, I think it is worth taking a look at how we differ.

In regard to people stock piling ammo and guns, it has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with fear of our rights being taken from us. The left is already taking this tragedy as an opportunity to push their anti- gun legislation. In the near future, the responsible law abiding gun owners may face major restriction because some nut job couldn't control himself.

 

[Deerguy45]

I don't use assault weapons to kill deer or any animal I hunt. I don't want any extra gun laws but don't jump off a bridge quite yet. I am an educator as well. Let's see what becomes of this first. I would like people to slow down a bit considering the media will over use any hot button phrase they can to get you worked up. I understand that banning guns will not solve any problems but you do have to have them in the conversation. People who own guns are not always responsible. People need to lock their guns up so people that have mental issues cannot get to them.

My 2 cents is to spend some money to secure our schools. Using metal detectors, on campus police officers. I also think that each school should have a crisis team consisting of staff that would be able to access some sort of weapon on campus. We would obviously have to pay them extra to be willing to put their life on the line.

I'm sure I will get ripped on but thats ok had to post my 2 cents just like you. Don't let the media cloud your thinking.