BREAKING: Democrats Introduce Assault Weapons Ban Bill in Congress. Again.

Word comes from NBC News that following the shootings in Las Vegas and Texas the Senate Democrats have once more introduced a new bill designed to ban “assault weapons” within the United States.

The original Assault Weapons Ban was enacted in 1994, championed by Dianne Feinstein in the wake of the Luby’s mass shooting that left 23 people dead. The intent was to limit the ability for attackers to inflict mass casualties by keeping “weapons of war” off the streets and limiting the capacity of magazines. It expired in 2004 when it was not renewed under the Bush administration.

According to a 2013 Obama Administration Department of Justice memo which analyzed the effectiveness of the law, it found that the Assault Weapons Ban had no impact on reducing crime or the murder rate in the United States, and that implementing the same legislation again would have little to no effect on the safety of American citizens for decades to come. This is further supported by a 2013 National Academy study which came to the same conclusions.

Despite this evidence (as well as opposition from the majority of American voters) the Democrats and specifically Dianne Feinstein have continued to re-introduce the bill following every mass shooting event. The latest incarnation was following the Sandy Hook shooting, where her bill received a public hearing but failed to make it out of committee even with a Democrat controlled Senate and White House.

The full text of the latest proposal has yet to be released, but odds are that it is another copy-and-paste from the original Assault Weapons Ban from 1994. For more information on why an Assault Weapons Ban is a terrible idea see this article.

comments

  1. avatar DoomGuy says:

    The GOP and the NRA will throw their support behind this in 3,2,1…

    I wish I could say I was kidding, but unfortunately this one is probably gonna pass… sorry to be the eternal pessimist, but I have no trust in people.

    1. avatar Defens says:

      Hardly

      1. avatar DoomGuy says:

        RINO’s like Grassley, Cornyn and all the other communists with R’s behind their name will gladly vote for this if it means giving preserving the establishment, and do you really think Trump is gonna do the right thing? Nope, especially not since Ivanka and Jared don’t want Americans having guns.

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          What gun control measures has Cornyn supported in the past?

        2. avatar Shotgun Sam says:

          Why wait for the gubernment? Just DIY AWB!

          Skip to the final minutes if you want the gist.

        3. avatar Stereodude says:

          Shotgun Sam, I make it a point to not pay attention to people who too stupid to rotate their camera 90 degrees when shooting video. However, you’ll have to let us know if he castrates himself because he doesn’t trust himself to be armed with a penis with all the incidences of rape in the news.

        4. avatar DDay says:

          BS. They didn’t fold after sandy hook, stop with the fake news bs.

      2. avatar TruthTellers says:

        Doomguy is right. If for some reason, God forbid, this bill passed the House, it has an even greater chance of passing the Senate. Turncoats like Collins, Murkowski, Graham, McCain, Rubio, and any other woman Senator who is Repub would likely vote for this bill.

        Except for maybe Joni Ernst, who I am now having very naughty thoughts about <3

        Trump would veto it, but the fact remains that the Republicans in Congress are not the type of people to advance or defend the 2nd Amendment.

    2. avatar John says:

      What many idiots do not realize is, I am the NRA my Friends are the NRA, my neighbors are the NRA. Most of us swore to defend the Constitution if the United States. Just as did this ahole who introduced that bill.

      The difference in those idiots in Washington and the rest of us, is simple we stand behind our word and they are pos cowards.

    3. avatar Rob "NazyCegroWithAGun" Williams says:

      Nick Leghorn has already discredited himself countless times, he consistently misrepresents what happening, only a fool would read his articles… which of course means EVERYONE here devours his awful distortive writing…

      1. avatar Eric Lawrence says:

        Dude, it’s 2:23 AM. Stop planning the next mass shooting and go to bed!

    4. avatar Angelo Montour says:

      These politicians aways want to disarm the law-abiding citizens. They can fund killing thousands of unborn children but they always point fingers to hid their guilt. We the people need to throw them out of office and stop funding stupid hypocrisy.

  2. avatar joetast says:

    Assault weapons? Clarification please. Pointy sticks and large rocks?

    1. avatar Chris says:

      “It looks scary! Nobody needs more than 10 rounds! That rifle can kill people!” Hey, maybe I should run for office. I’ve memorized their script and can cry on cue, why the hell not?

    2. avatar Patriot says:

      Barrel Shrouds

      1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

        Are mlok rails barrel shrouds? What about key mod? Or just a true shroud on my tec9?

        1. avatar Quasimofo says:

          The way “barrel shroud” is defined in the bill it could even be used to ban a rifle with a two-piece stock with a “traditional”-style forend.

    3. avatar Southern Cross says:

      What is an “assault weapon”?

      Anything you want it to be.

      Today it is a AR-15 or AKM clone.

      Tomorrow it is a stock SKS or Mini-14.

      Then it is a Lee-Enfield (10 rounds is too many).

      Then it is a collectable Mauser 98 (looks too military).

      Then it is your grandpa’s Winchester 94 (lever actions give rapid fire).

      Then it is your Remington or Winchester hunting rifle (who needs to hunt with a “sniper rifle”).

      Then it anything above a single-shot .22 or air rifle.

      When the term is deliberately vague it can be whatever needs to be.

  3. avatar little horn says:

    god, how stupid can these people be???? they just keep beating that dead horse.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      Never interrupt your enemy while he’s busy repeating a huge mistake.

      It’s like 1994 was beyond their collective memories.

  4. avatar Joe R. says:

    B A N

    T H E

    E V I L

    P O S

    ( D )

    They are all an Fing S C O U R G E, and all of the problems we have in America come from their power grab.

    F them and the rinos, and all of their voters.

    Like the French Revolution (May 05, 1789); Russian Revolution (Mar 08, 1917); when the POS (D)s shizzay gets unbearable, all those MFs will be the last to know.

  5. avatar Chris says:

    Jesus tap-dancing…

    “This bill won’t remove every mass-shooting but it will begin removing these weapons of war from our streets.”

    Right, keep telling yourself that. You and the 87 other demo-rats that supported it who live with their heads so far up their asses you can’t tell if they’re farting or drafting another bill that I wouldn’t wipe my ass with. Criminals don’t care about your laws and gun control, that’s what makes them criminals. All it will do is restrict the law-abiding/compliant owners. People like that fat kid who shot up a church and the other guy who took Las Vegas by the balls couldn’t give a damn less about what passes.

    1. avatar Clifford Mechels says:

      The Democrats want guns banned so they can make their rise to a dicatatorship a reality. Why else would they consistently push for more gun control laws/bans and to destroy the constitution, increase surveillence of citizens, try to start the first step to eliminating “due process” by banning people on the no fly list from buying guns even though there is no PROOF that those people are any threat to anyone except in the mind of some goverment official, and doing their best with “Identity Politics” to create as much divisiveness as possible between people?

  6. avatar TruthTellers says:

    You know what would be more effective than an AWB? An NICS database that was accurate and up to date.

    1. avatar DoomGuy says:

      “You know what would be more effective than an AWB?”

      Actually repealing gun control laws, expanding firearms freedom, and not accepting their BS arguments about background checks and other draconian infringements.

    2. avatar Joe R. says:

      Bullshit Teller – know what will be the ONLY working AWB ban?

      JESUS coming back.

      Because, so the F help me, as soon as they’re banned, I’m going into production of cheap black market full auto weapons (some people need “blueprints” others just need a half-ass mental picture)https://homemadeguns.wordpress.com/

      IF THE MF’S CAN MAKE ME PAY FOR THEM TO FUND KILLING BABIES (should have been made illegal but Title X funding and Medicaid funding of abortions is still a ‘thing’ [https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/18/40/1840b04b-55d3-4c00-959d-11817023ffc8/20170526_annualreport_p02_singles.pdf]), I NEED TO WORK HARDER TO MORE POSITIVELY DIVERSIFY MY FING INCOME STREAMS.

      1. avatar Arc says:

        That website is awesome, bookmarked.

  7. avatar Billy bob joe says:

    Thousands of ar-15’s out there and even more Ghost guns, Totally impossible to remove them with this bill so hows it going to affect these weapons? Absolutely no effect whatsoever. Someone please put her in a home.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      bbj – it’s not what they can ‘get rid of’.

      IT’S

      WHO

      THEY CAN GET RID OF, IF YOU ARE CAUGHT WITH AN ILLEGALLY POSSESSED WEAPON.

      IF THEY PUT IT ON YOU, YOU HAVE TO PUT IT ON THEM AND THEIRS, PERMANENT-LIKE.
      “I’m going to plead with you, do not cross us. Because if you do, the survivors will write about what we do here for 10,000 years.” – Mattis

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      If it is like the last bill, it will only prohibit future sales, not ban existing firearms or magazines with the “hope” that a decrease in renewed supplies will eventually result in a reduction of the number or rifles “in the street.” That was California’s hope and prayer way back in 1989, but it blew up in their face when someone invented a workaround (the Bullet Button). They have been trying for the last few years to “correct” the law to effectuate its original intent of banning black rifles, but so far their efforts are more of a nuisance than a hindrance.

      1. avatar chango says:

        This would just be the begining. When mass shootings keep happening they will require registration of “grandfathered weapons”, push outright bans on magazines over 10 rds, bans on accessories, ect, ect until we are down to break-action single shot shotguns and airsoft.

        Something feels different this time. More shootings with hyper media frenzies or even tit for tat backroom deals between the lawmakers make this bill a real threat.

        1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

          See California, the State of, for the playbook! Their only mistake was leaving the sunset rule in last time. They won’t make the same mistake next time they are in control.

          I do want to see the updated evil weapon list, I need to see how my weapons of war collection is coming! Still got a ways to go to reach 208! I wonder if any real weapons of war are on the list, like a mosin or garand?

        2. avatar Big Bill says:

          See New York, state of, to see how well registration of “assault weapons” (under the “Safe Act”) works. Hint: Not well at all. Response was… underwhelming. Without a registry of who owns them, there’s no way for the state to know who has them. New York has no such registry.

    3. avatar Patriot says:

      It’s probably closer to millions

      1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

        It’s really closer to 10 million.

    4. avatar Big Bill says:

      Not even the most rabid anti-gunners actually expect any police force to go house-to-house to collect guns. They don’t even expect the military to do this. They know what would happen.
      So it would be future sales they want to end.
      However, there’s a problem…
      As was demonstrated with the last AWB, any described gun can be redesigned to meet the requirements to be sold. Thumbhole stocks, pinned flash hiders, bayonet mounts ground off or simply left off, domestic parts to replace imported ones, whatever. We are a people who can adapt.
      Plus, anyone can buy a milling machine or a 3D printer.
      I can buy parts off the shelf in Lowes to make a zip gun.
      A gun doesn’t need to look like an AR to shoot, something they don’t seem to understand at all.

  8. avatar DoomGuy says:

    Still, let them keep pushing their gun ban bills. It will hopefully kill their chances with voters.

    But knowing how worthless most Americans are I’d say this will increase their popularity.

    What the hell has happened to our country?

  9. avatar Macofjack says:

    Stupid is as stupid does!

  10. avatar WI Patriot says:

    “BREAKING: Democrats Introduce Assault Weapons Ban Bill in Congress. Again.”

    And the definition of insanity is…
    Doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results…

    Liberalism IS a mental disorder…

  11. avatar strych9 says:

    Going no where and already declared unconstitutional by SCOTUS decision anyway.

    Virtue signalling and nothing more.

    1. avatar DoomGuy says:

      Leave it to republicans though to sell us out in order to curry favor with democrats.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        First, I doubt that will happen.

        Second, as I said SCOTUS has already stated plainly that this isn’t legal.

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          “Second, as I said SCOTUS has already stated plainly that this isn’t legal.”

          Link, please?

        2. avatar Geoff PR says:

          Strych, I’m not trying to be any more of an ass that I naturally am, but can you point out where SCOTUS said an AWB is un-constitutional?

        3. avatar strych9 says:

          See DC v. Heller 1. (f) which states in part:

          “…United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174 , does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes. Pp. 47–54.” [Emphasis mine.]

          In other words Miller doesn’t allow the government to limit the right to keep and bear arms to the militia but rather allows for a definition of what “militia arms” are. Those arms, which may not be banned as per Heller are those that are “in common use for lawful purposes”.

          “Assault weapons” being 1) common (the AR is known as “America’s Rifle” FFS) and 2) generally used for lawful purposes is therefore protected by the language of Heller.

          Further, see other parts of that decision such as “…amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition—in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional muster.”

          Now, Americans might not “overwhelmingly” choose semi-auto rifles for “lawful purposes of self-defense” but they choose them for a wide variety of other legal activities. The court has effectively said that unless the weapons are uncommon, unusual or generally used “as a class” for unlawful activity they are protected by the 2A.

          So, I say there is no real reason to worry about DiFi’s bill. It won’t go anywhere and even if it did it’s attacking an entire class of firearms that are common and generally used lawfully which is something the SCOTUS has already said doesn’t pass constitutional muster.

          Sorry it took me so long to get back to you. I was wrenching on a project bike in my garage.

    2. avatar BLoving says:

      I’ll put it firmly in the same file as the current “impeachment proceedings” that have been initiated…
      Pity we can’t have a “You’re wasting everyone’s time” penalty for repeat violators. 🤠

    3. avatar Raoul Duke says:

      If SCOTUS said so then the lower courts didn’t get the memo since every case that has specifically targeted “assault weapons” has been upheld including the recent case in Maryland.

  12. avatar Paranoid prepper says:

    So what do we do when a psycho learns how to quad load and goes on a shooting spree with an 870 pump? Would love to hear the liberal narative after that happened

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      “So what do we do when a psycho learns how to ” . . . defeat our government. What do we repel them / defend ourselves with? (Think it can’t happen? China and Iran are working day and night to accomplish it.)

      KEEP YOUR GUNS FOR THE END OF AMERICA.

      all those proclaiming it won’t / can’t happen, are those who are working the most diligently to bring it about.

  13. avatar bob says:

    This crap is going to lead the crazies to using other methods to destroy and I would sure rather be shot at than blown up!

    1. avatar Lucas D. says:

      The crazies will still get and keep their guns. They did during the last AWB, as we all remember from the Columbine massacre.

      But it’s not about stopping the crazies. DiFi and her ilk already know these laws won’t stop them, and they don’t give a single shit. It’s about taking power away from you and me to expand and solidify their own.

      1. avatar bob says:

        They have to justify all the anti gun money they have been living off of for years.

  14. avatar Anymouse says:

    Obviously Sutherland Springs and Mandalay Bay wouldn’t have happened if the perpetrators didn’t have bayonet lugs, flash suppressors, or collapsible stocks on their rifles.

    1. avatar Patriot says:

      You forgot barrel shrouds, God the barrel shrouds!

      1. avatar Quasimofo says:

        Don’t forget the pistol grips. Using one of those is like shaking hands with the Devil himself! Ban them for the children!

  15. avatar Helms Deep says:

    At what point do we admit we are at the time to – ” Revoke Consent Of The Governed ” ?

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      Wait, you haven’t yet? Dude, that homework was due in years ago.

      Copy off of someone.

  16. avatar JohnnyL says:

    Give up already you idiots. Seriously, you don’t even understand what you are trying to ban. Your just morons who want to take away freedoms. That’s what liberalism is all about. Gov’t control of the people.

  17. avatar LarryinTX says:

    I have to raise the “fail” flag on this article, RF! While you referred to the AWB in ’95 being pushed after the Luby’s shooting, it should be required to add “in which no assault weapon was involved, killer used handguns.”

    Never let a crisis go to waste.

    1. avatar ACP_arms says:

      Actually, thanks to the ever so clear though process of the Left, a “assault pistol” is any handgun that uses a detachable magazines. (The Glock 17 and Ruger P89 the killer used) Thus the killer at Luby’s used a “assault weapon”.

      I wish I was making that up.

  18. avatar CalGunsMD says:

    ON DiFi’s FB page, she says:

    “We’re introducing an updated Assault Weapons Ban for one reason: so that after every mass shooting with a military-style assault weapon, the American people will know that a tool to reduce these massacres is sitting in the Senate, ready for debate and a vote.
    This bill won’t stop every mass shooting, but it will begin removing these weapons of war from our streets. The first Assault Weapons Ban was just starting to show an effect when the NRA stymied its reauthorization in 2004. Yes, it will be a long process to reduce the massive supply of these assault weapons in our country, but we’ve got to start somewhere.
    To those who say now isn’t the time, they’re right—we should have extended the original ban 13 years ago, before hundreds more Americans were murdered with these weapons of war. To my colleagues in Congress, I say do your job.”

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      This is called “guilt tripping.”

      1. avatar Joe R. says:

        No, it’s called Broke Back M(D) bagging.

        FU POS (calMD)

      2. avatar Geoff PR says:

        “This is called “guilt tripping.””

        Progressives are licensed travel agents for guilt trips.

        (And any other head trip in existence…)

  19. avatar Mark Kelly's Diapered Drooling Ventriloquist's Dummy says:

    “I See Ghost Gun People” Trevor in The Sixth Sense. Boo!

    Order your uppers and lowers now then start drillin’ & millin’.

  20. avatar Anonymous says:

    Yep yep! Gotta ban “military style” because “style” is dangerous. Also have to ban those scary standard capacity 30rd magazines that anyone can print from a 3D printer. A box, a spring, and a piece of plastic are all they are – but they must be regulated! And that regulation will definitely be effective for criminals! Just before they murder someone – they will say, “I need to take only the 10rd mags!”

    These people are so disconnected from reality its astounding

  21. avatar Marus (Aurelius) Payne says:

    I’m getting tired of legislation born of superstition.

    1. avatar BLoving says:

      You’re close: superstitions about demographic groups (blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Hindus, gun owners, etc.) is properly called “bigotry”.

  22. avatar wd-40 says:

    Don’t underestimate your enemy, guys.
    Every time we say That can’t happen, It does! (Springfield armory/RRA in Illinois)
    What if the AWB is passed Ex post facto, you know like what they did with the bumpstock.
    Millions of MSR’s made Illegal overnight, And now you’ve committed a federal crime for owning one. THE QUICKEST WAY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN IS TO SAY IT WON’T HAPPEN.
    Stay vigilant.

    1. avatar Patriot says:

      They can’t even keep the felons in prison we do have, good luck when they create a few million more felons overnight.

  23. avatar chango says:

    This is essentially California’s current AW Ban with a grandfather clause instead of registration.

    I’m sure registration is next.

    1. avatar Big Bill says:

      New York’s “Safe Act” shows just how effective voluntary registration is. Or isn’t.

  24. avatar jwm says:

    Never Trump. Remember that?

    Bet you’re glad hillary sandbagged bernie and neither one of those commies made it in.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “Bet you’re glad hillary sandbagged bernie and neither one of those commies made it in.”

      For now, yes.

      Sooner or later they will regain power, and they will enact that legislation.

      Our only hope then will be SCOTUS ruling it unconstitutional.

      Unfortunately, when they regain power, they will pack SCOTUS with Leftists scum…

  25. avatar Joe R. says:

    GrASSley (R) IA set to hold http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/359049-senate-panel-to-hold-hearings-on-bump-stocks.

    They must have pictures of him with farm animals in the barn.

  26. avatar Sabrina M Gray says:

    Feinstein is up for election and is getting primaried from Ghost Gun DeLeon on the left apparently, so she needs to show that she is doing something.

  27. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    And what about pistols…that kill WAY more people?
    What about harsher sentencing?
    Oh…it would mean more black and brown young men in prison…racist…right?

  28. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    The symbolism party is (re)introducing an assault weapons ban extension so we’ll all know a pointless repetition of something that didn’t help the first time is sitting there waiting to waste everybody’s time again … and who insisted on doing this, to make a point one assumes.

    It appears these D-weenies learned nothing from watching the endless health care reforms the R-party introduced with no chance of their ever being adopted.

    The point is they’re all about pointless symbolism, and think we’re rubes. The other point is that they think this is a path to political victory for them.

  29. avatar Dan Dixon says:

    I find it curious that someone whos last name is Feinstein, is so fond of Nazi policies.

    1. avatar Timmy The Bone says:

      Feinstein and her buddies have been pushing this for decades.

    2. avatar WI Patriot says:

      Like any traitor, she’s what they’d call in WW2, a collaborator…And during WW2, those collaborators were hunted down and dealt with, being a little more civilized, we just need to vote them out of office…

  30. avatar Bubba Watson says:

    From 2007 to 2011, democrats had the votes to bring back the ban.
    Why didn’t they do it then ?
    Dubya said “Send me the bill and I will sign it” and Obama would have signed it.

  31. avatar Timmy The Bone says:

    This is not about “assault rifles”, what this is really about is control. Go do some reading about whom has been pushing gun legislation for decades. Go read about whom pushed the 1968 NFA and has been behind every piece of legislation since. You think its just a conspiracy theory but its fact. The same people that want gun control are the same people who want immigration amnesty and open borders.

    What its really about is CONTROL. Them CONTROLLING YOU. Get it. Its not about violence. Right now they can only do so much because at some point they might get severe blowback. Once there are no guns watch the gloves really come off. They want the country to become a liberal utopia like the UK where everything is illegal and you have no say in anything they do. We are almost at that point now – they ram taxes down our throats whether we want them or not, pass legislation that no one wants yet it continues to happen.

    You can bet your sweet bippy that if they get control of one of the houses they are going to keep this going. You watch and see. Disarming the population is a long term goal of the communists and socialists. And thats exactly what these people are, never forget it.

  32. avatar chicago-chicago says:

    I am registering as a Democrat. I think we all should so we can vote in the primary, respond to polls exe call into shows as a dem, exe. Shift the direction of the party. at least on guns.

  33. avatar todd says:

    Nobody is trying to take away your guns. Oh, sorry, I didn’t receive my new talking points from the libs.

  34. avatar Idahptaxpayer says:

    Why dont the lawmakers concentrate on making laws and laws going to prison for government coverups, and lying and deceiving we the people, money laundering, corruption. In other words spend time cleaning up government! Yes, clean up coverups! Worry about telling we the people the truth! JFK file release? What a sham to we the people. Lawmakers….get a grip on reality!!!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email