Assault Weapons Ban of 2019

[Muss Muggins]

This bill is starting to gain a little traction in the House, with some Republican outliers beginning to sign on, most recently a Long Island Republican. It mirrors the Senate version introduced by Senator Feinstein earlier this year, right down to the typo in the header for the enumerated list of "FIREARMS EXEMPTED BY THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN OF 2017 . . ."

Text - H.R.1296 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Assault Weapons Ban of 2019 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

The key differences between this bill and the 1994 ban seem to be the requirement to transfer banned semi-automatic assault weapons via FFL and NICS, and the inability to transfer pre-ban high capacity magazines at all. There is also a "safe storage" requirement for the banned but grandfathered and still legally possessed semi-automatic assault weapons. High capacity magazines manufactured after the ban must be dated, and are illegal for private citizens to possess.

Time to start writing and calling your federal lawmakers . . .

 

[gman51]

So just what manufacturer of gun magazines is going to make illegal to own magazines? They will not make what they can't sell. The gun manufacturers will most likely have to redesign all new guns to hold 10 or under rounds.

H. R. 1296
To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.

There it is! Infringement of the 2nd Amendment which is totally unconstitutional.

..and for other purposes? Just what other purposes could be tagged onto the bill? I would not be surprised if anything semi auto gets added as an assault weapon. Revolvers might be making a huge comeback.

There are at least 201 co-sponsors of this bill. Almost all being Democrats.

The 1994 ban passed which makes me wonder if this new ban will pass due to all the mass killings recently. Evidently it is being pushed heavily by Pelosi. Sorry to say but Trump has said the NRA will come around.

I just received a letter from one of my senators stating he is against any 2nd Amendment infringement.

Now is not the time to sit back and be quiet concerning infringement of our 2nd Amendment.

 

[squidsix]

...no expiration date. Last time things got ugly for the folks who supported the 94 ban, and many paid the price at the polls.
This time...?
My guess is either this bill dies, or changes dramatically before some version of it passes. Either way, we can expect a slight uptick in "mass" shootings and all along people will forget that it is already illegal to hurt people, and all hurting of any people is already a crime on the books in every municipality on the planet.

 

[delcrossv]

Here's the sole GOP co-sponsor. Our New York members should consider writing or calling. (be polite)

Peter T. King | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

It would also be worth while to call or write Sen. McConnell as well as your Senators to urge them to not take this bill up in any form.

 

[Rule3]

It is just typical copy and paste legislation.

Just keep throwing stuff against the wall and see what sticks.

 

[italiansport]

The original Assault Weapons Ban was definitively shown to have zero influence on the crime rate and that's why it was allowed to expire. The ONE effect it did have was to make a relatively obscure semi-auto version of a military rifle very popular with collectors. The net effect is that there are now millions of them in private hands. I guess "live and learn" is not something Congress believes in!
Jim

 

[Barr1]

The genie is out of the bottle and the market is saturated. AR15 30 round magazines are $8-15 new, new AR15s are $400-600, used AR15 bring $200-600 for general brands.

Any legislation is knee-jerk and punitive. Even if supply is cutoff the market is glutted and prices cannot support a large rise.

 

[Sistema1927]

The original Assault Weapons Ban was definitively shown to have zero influence on the crime rate and that's why it was allowed to expire. The ONE effect it did have was to make a relatively obscure semi-auto version of a military rifle very popular with collectors. The net effect is that there are now millions of them in private hands. I guess "live and learn" is not something Congress believes in!
Jim

Isn't that the truth. I used the M16 in the Army, and didn't really warm up to it. In fact, while in Korea I volunteered to be in the QRF as an M60 gunner (which also allowed me to carry a M1911.)

It was the threat of the 1994 ban that led me to purchase my first AR15, a Bushmaster. Since that time I have built 7 others, in various configurations and calibers, including pistols, carbines, and rifles. I have also accumulated quite a number of "high capacity" magazines.

Without the ban, and the hoopla surrounding it, I would have probably limited my semi-auto rifles to Garand, M1 Carbine, and Rem 742. But now I am fully hooked and fully convinced of the validity of the AR platform.

 

[bummer]

So just what manufacturer of gun magazines is going to make illegal to own magazines? They will not make what they can't sell. The gun manufacturers will most likely have to redesign all new guns to hold 10 or under rounds.

H. R. 1296
To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.

There it is! Infringement of the 2nd Amendment which is totally unconstitutional.

..and for other purposes? Just what other purposes could be tagged onto the bill? I would not be surprised if anything semi auto gets added as an assault weapon. Revolvers might be making a huge comeback.

There are at least 201 co-sponsors of this bill. Almost all being Democrats.

The 1994 ban passed which makes me wonder if this new ban will pass due to all the mass killings recently. Evidently it is being pushed heavily by Pelosi. Sorry to say but Trump has said the NRA will come around.

I just received a letter from one of my senators stating he is against any 2nd Amendment infringement.

Now is not the time to sit back and be quiet concerning infringement of our 2nd Amendment.

When did a politician ever worry about infringing upon ones rights

 

[Sistema1927]

When did a politician ever worry about infringing upon ones rights

This crop of politicians doesn't even realize that the US Constitution is a limitation on their power, and not that of the citizenry. That is why they insist on a "living" Constitution that they can bend like a pretzel.

 

[rednichols]

I do like to figure things out in advance; and to do that I 'trawl' newsites (and holstorical databases) more than once a day, and many more than one site; representing both left and right. Doing that I worked out, for example, on the day before his election exactly how Mr. Trump could be elected -- and the day of his election I watched it happen. I didn't guess (which was 50-50, eh?).

From that kind of trawling lately I have the impression that NOTHING can pass with regards to an assault weapons ban -- certainly not before November 2020 -- that has originated in the House, been sent over to the Senate, then back and forth -- and having to go to President Trump to be approved or vetoed.

And that's the way I'm betting. Instead I reckon there will something, in each of his Four Points earlier this month, that will be implemented. The interrelationship of red flags and mental health give legislators much more cover, if they're wanting to be re-elected. Which not all of 'em are (running for re-election in 2020.

So: I say to you, if you're not wanting government to TELL you what to do, time for you all to do some self-regulating. Assault rifles, bump stocks (that you all dropped the ball on), silencers, violent gaming, 'do what you want as long as it makes you happy'; gotta do the right thing instead of waiting on government to say yea or nay to the Second Amendment.

Your backs are against the wall because you all allowed it to happen; Vegas should've caused the firearms industry to realign itself and you all are the reason for the firearms industry. Write letters to THEM instead, they're in effect your representatives.

If the national vote doesn't go our way; that is, if Mr. Trump isn't our President in 2012, then the whole country will have slid off into the sea and I ain't never coming back. And not over your guns; you will have lost everything then, guns will be the least of your worries. Because you'l have a hippie for President; and to see what happens when a hippie becomes the head of state, look at New Zealand: Jacinta Ardern wasn't even elected -- instead her party won power and she was appointed by her party.

I vote. I vote in California, which means my vote counts for little and my vote for President counts for nothing because of the electorial system. But I vote, and I write to politicians and newspapers all over USA and even the world, regardless.

 

[Rule3]

11 Dems and 1 Rep (NY)cosponsored in August
Other than that, nothing since introduced 2/19

 

[delcrossv]

Your backs are against the wall because you all allowed it to happen; Vegas should've caused the firearms industry to realign itself and you all are the reason for the firearms industry. Write letters to THEM instead, they're in effect your representatives.

Write them to do what, exactly? Stop selling us guns?

Not being (too) facetious, but since when should the rights of the law abiding be restricted due to the acts of criminals?

CCL reciprocity would do more to reduce violent crime than any "red flag" or "assault weapons ban" legislation would.

Repealing the gun free schools act would do more.

Removing legal force from "no guns" signage would do even more.

See where I'm going here? When evil acts abound, the last thing you want to do is curtail the law abiding. That only helps the criminal.

 

[vt_shooter]

Lots of politicians view the citizenry as only being worthy of owning what the lowest common denominator can safely own. It doesn't matter to them if you've lived a lawful life for 60 years, and even served the country, you should still be treated like the lowest common denominator.

 

[dockmurgw]

I vote. I vote in California, which means my vote counts for little and my vote for President counts for nothing because of the electorial system.

My presidential vote counts for nothing also, due to the electoral college...but I accept that. And I say a word of thanks to our founders every 4 years for coming up with it, because without it CA and NY would be electing all of our presidents.

 

[rednichols]

Write them to do what, exactly? Stop selling us guns?

Absolutely not. I'm a Constitutionalist, probably like everyone here on this forum.

I was able to work out Mr. Trump's path to election, by expecting that American voters who believed in the Constitution and therefore in the 2nd Amendment, would turn out to vote and therefore for Mr. Trump.

My proxy for that, was the percentage of gun ownership by State. Comparing that with the electoral map, my model correctly picked all but four states to vote for the Republican candidate (which is how I voted); and those four were replaced by states the my model didn't pick. It was really something to watch the states vote Republican in close (but not exact) alignment with the highest gun ownership states.

So I'm not saying that it was gun owners per se, who elected Mr. Trump. I'm saying that American voters who believed in the Constitution and its original 10 Amendments, turned out to vote and voted Republican. When all the formal polls were wrong.

I read now, that huge gun distributor Ellett Brothers failed because they bought up big expecting a Clinton win. With too much inventory to support a Republican era, they entered bankruptcy. That's not a conspiracy theory; it's actually in Ellett's filings. The management there believed the official polls. Me, I no longer read them; not after they were wrong in a big way here, too, on Australia's national elections that went conservative, too, when the left was widely expected to win.

Let's have a bit more faith in Americans, to vote Republican in Nov 2020. The swing in the House, I believe, was a blip caused by outraged female voters.

 

[red14]

Stalin would approve of it;

''Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.''

''Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.''

''If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.''

Joseph Stalin

Robert Francis was just paraphrasing Stalin, I wonder if he knew it?

 

[Univibe]

Here's the kicker : does 2A protect semi auto military rifles and big magazines?

Lower federal courts are split. Some say these guns are weapons of war and uniquely dangerous; others say they are still small arms in common use and are protected.

Supreme court has not taken up the issue.

 

[ladder13]

Muskets were weapons of war.

 

[rednichols]

Here's the kicker : does 2A protect semi auto military rifles and big magazines?

Lower federal courts are split. Some say these guns are weapons of war and uniquely dangerous; others say they are still small arms in common use and are protected.

Supreme court has not taken up the issue.

I see that a lot has changed since Heller:

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 US 570 - Supreme Court 2008 - Google Scholar

Scrolling through this one will find the analysis that owning and using contemporary military arms was specifically contemplated by the Founders. On the other hand it's possible that the several cases decided SINCE then have muddled the issue; I didn't try to sort them all out, the will be sorted out by SCOTUS itself in the near future (and the rifle owners will win on the issue if not on the merits of their own case).

I assume/expect that all these cases are stickies on this Forum .