Senate ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Outlaws 205 Guns

Source: From The Trenches/Breitbart
Published: Sep 27, 2019
Author: AWR Hawkins
Post Date: 2019-09-28 07:24:48 by Deckard
Views: 3660

Breitbart – by AWR Hawkins

The Senate “assault weapons” ban outlaws 205 specific guns, magazines holding 11 rounds or more, and bump stocks, which are already illegal.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the bill’s sponsor, cites alleged benefits from the 1994-2004 “assault weapons” ban in an effort to bolster the chances for passage of the new version. However, she ignores the Department of Justice’s National Institute of Justice report showing that the 1994-2004 ban could not take credit for any reduction in crime.

In addition to banning 205 different guns, “high capacity” magazines, and bump stocks, the Senate “assault weapons” ban includes a universal background check requirement for any future transfer of firearms covered by the ban.

Like the 1994-2004 ban, Feinstein’s bill defines “assault weapons” based on cosmetic features. Therefore, the legislation bans commonly owned semiautomatic rifles that take detachable magazines and “[have] one or more military characteristics including a pistol grip, a forward grip, a barrel shroud, a threaded barrel or a folding or telescoping stock.”

During the September 12, 2019, Democrat debate, Robert “Beto” O’Rourke said, “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15.”

The National Shooting Sports Foundation calculates 16 million-plus privately owned AR-15s are in the United States.

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com. Sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/27/senate-assault-weapons-ban-outlaws-205-guns/


Poster Comment:

Feinstein Statement on House Assault Weapons Ban Hearing

Post Comment   Private Reply

#1: IbJensen    To: Deckard (#0)

Crock of sh-t!

This should be the final straw. Banning citizens' weaponry is the key to enslavement. Our Congress and their legions of staffers (unelected legislators) have done such a bang-up job of enslavement. They design our cars, homes, light bulbs, health care (which a few short decades ago was NEVER a topic of conversation, let alone legislation) education, etc etc etc.

These pansies we elect to govern and ruin our country and our lives are mostly worthless to do anything more than Satan's bidding.

IbJensen posted on 2019-09-28 10:08:43   Reply   Private Reply


#2: misterwhite    To: Deckard (#0)

This bill is similar to the 1994 assault weapons ban. It doesn't affect current ownership.

And I expect it will have the exact same effect on crime -- -- -- none.

misterwhite posted on 2019-09-28 10:57:16   Reply   Private Reply


#3: Tooconservative    To: misterwhite (#2)

This bill is similar to the 1994 assault weapons ban. It doesn't affect current ownership.

The article didn't say that. I noticed no mention of grandfathering at all. Lame-ass reporting.

I'd like to know which weapons these 205 are by name. Maybe there will be some nice little discounts. I'm still gun shopping.

Tooconservative posted on 2019-09-28 13:05:09   Reply   Private Reply


#4: jeremiad    To: misterwhite (#2)

The AWB of the GHWB/WJC era cannot be allowed to happen again. It should have never happened last time as it is an infringement on the RKBA. Seriously "mister", this is something worth drawing a line and dying for. Either we are men or meeces, as a well loved cartoon character once said.

The social contract between government and the sovereigns(which is what we all are, not citizens) has been broken for a while. Once weapons are gone, there will be nothing but Gods grace to save us. Not much chance of that, since we gave up the opportunity to save ourselves. We will just have to suffer in slavery until government once again "gives us our freedom". Like that has ever happened.

We had better hope the End Times come, and we don't have to suffer any more than 7 years. If not, the darkness will last for thousands of year. There are a lot more pieces in place in 2019 as opposed to the last time defensive weapons were banned. In 2019 the elected leaders, have neither souls, heart or brains. They already wear the "boots that wish to stomp on our faces forever."

jeremiad posted on 2019-09-28 16:28:30   Reply   Private Reply


#5: misterwhite    To: Tooconservative (#3)

The article didn't say that.

Correct. I looked up the bill.

misterwhite posted on 2019-09-28 16:47:51   Reply   Private Reply


#6: misterwhite    To: Tooconservative (#3)

I'd like to know which weapons these 205 are by name.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/66/text

misterwhite posted on 2019-09-28 16:53:53   Reply   Private Reply


#7: Tooconservative    To: misterwhite (#6)

I notice they list thousands of rifles/shotguns that won't be banned by the bill.

"Look, you can still buy any of these boring-ass guns instead of the ones you actually want."

Tooconservative posted on 2019-09-28 20:55:57   Reply   Private Reply


#8: misterwhite    To: Tooconservative (#7)

Look, you can still buy any of these boring-ass guns instead of the ones you actually want."

I want the double-barreled one so I can fire two warning shots into the air, thereby turning my shotgun into an expensive club.

misterwhite posted on 2019-09-29 12:27:38   Reply   Private Reply


#9: Tooconservative    To: misterwhite (#8)

I want the double-barreled one so I can fire two warning shots into the air, thereby turning my shotgun into an expensive club.

Isn't that the expert Joe Biden advice on using shotguns in home invasions? Along with just shooting through the door? We do have that thread about cops shooting through a door going and my position is the same. I don't want Joe Biden shooting blindly through doors the same way I don't want cops to do it.

Tooconservative posted on 2019-09-29 14:50:05   Reply   Private Reply


#10: misterwhite    To: Tooconservative (#9)

We do have that thread about cops shooting through a door ...

Geez Louise. You're as bad as Deckard.

That's a 2017 case where a grand jury refused to indict the cops.

misterwhite posted on 2019-09-30 09:34:11   Reply   Private Reply


#11: Tooconservative    To: misterwhite, Deckard (#10)

Geez Louise. You're as bad as Deckard.

I'm not sure that even Deckard is as bad as Deckard.

Some of you guys that hate him so much seem increasingly like the kind of men who would scream "Eeeek" and jump on a chair if you saw a mouse. Or a wasp or bee or spider.

Tooconservative posted on 2019-09-30 10:26:29   Reply   Private Reply


#12: misterwhite    To: Tooconservative (#11)

Some of you guys that hate him so much seem increasingly like the kind of men who would scream "Eeeek" and jump on a chair

Nah. That's Deckard.

Here's my theory: He posts these articles because what he really wants is to be reassured by Gatlin and me that the story isn't true and everything's going to be fine.

misterwhite posted on 2019-09-30 12:11:55   Reply   Private Reply


#13: Tooconservative    To: misterwhite, Deckard (#12)

Here's my theory: He posts these articles because what he really wants is to be reassured by Gatlin and me that the story isn't true and everything's going to be fine.

So you and Gatlin are just trying to reassure a nervous fussy baby and are just trying to be Good Daddies to poor neurotic Deckard?

Can you adduce any further facts to support this theory? I'm interested.

Tooconservative posted on 2019-09-30 15:32:18   Reply   Private Reply


#14: misterwhite    To: Tooconservative (#13)

So you and Gatlin are just trying to reassure a nervous fussy baby and are just trying to be Good Daddies to poor neurotic Deckard?

That's my theory, anyways. No proof.

misterwhite posted on 2019-09-30 16:10:59   Reply   Private Reply