Senate Bill 736

S

stansdds

Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
10,743
Reaction score
15,415
Location
Virginia
Heads up! On March 11, 2021, Senator Diane Feinstein introduced S.736, the bill is titled as "A bill to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes".


At this time, the bill has been read twice, has 34 co-sponsors, has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, but has yet to be printed for public inspection. Bills are normally printed and available for public inspection 2 days after being entered into the Senate. Interesting that this one is still a mystery bill.


I suggest keeping a close eye on this one.



Text - S.736 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): A bill to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
 
Register to hide this ad
Muss Muggins said:
Neither Senator from the Show Me State will support this legislation . . .
Click to expand...
Please tell me that both are democrats.
Hopefully the senators and republicans will remember the debacle after approval of the Clinton Assault ban which pretty much switched over both houses at the next election
 
CAJUNLAWYER said:
Please tell me that both are democrats.
Hopefully the senators and republicans will remember the debacle after approval of the Clinton Assault ban which pretty much switched over both houses at the next election
Click to expand...

Dude, one of mine is the now infamous Josh Hawley. The AWB was a much different animal. It was but a small part of the massive Violent Crime Control bill, which had wide Republican support. I doubt the AWB would have passed if it was a stand alone, like the bill in this thread topic. Most of the provisions of that bill have since been termed at the least "draconian," and I'd be surprised if any of the provisions were still in effect.

I agree that the 1996 fallout was epic.
 
STILL find it interesting that no one 'on the hill' seems particularly interested in the concept of putting real teeth into gun violence convictions.
I.E. - coming down HARD on actual criminals.

How about - no plea bargaining, no probation, LONG sentences, no 'good time', no parole. Actually address the CRIMINAL element?
But - realize this may have a detrimental effect on votes from 'the constituency'.

So - let's just place the bootheel on law abiding Americans instead.
 
I contacted my two Senators, Scott and Rubio. They are both Republicans, but I’ll see how true they are when it comes to voting on these bills. BTW, these two, and my House Rep, Kat Cammack (R), by reply to my emails dived they prefer direct contact vice emails generated via the third party method, such as NRA, GOA, or FPC websites. This is interesting as I now wonder how many of such generated correspondence winds up in the round filing cabinet.
 
Last edited:
CAJUNLAWYER said:
Please tell me that both are democrats.
Hopefully the senators and republicans will remember the debacle after approval of the Clinton Assault ban which pretty much switched over both houses at the next election
Click to expand...

That was then, we were a different country. We just witnessed an election where the outcome was based entirely on personality, accomplishments meant nothing. Those of us that feel strongly on the subject are aging out, being replaced by generations that base their opinion on facebook likes, their #1 issue is climate change. And then, as if were not fighting an uphill battle already, yesterdays event in Atlanta is already being used by the usual bottom feeders to promote this law. My prediction: S-736 will pass in some form, with Republicrat support. We lost this battle years ago when we lost the public schools.
 
Martya said:
Used to be an automatic 5 yrs added to sentences when a gun was used when committing a crime. Guess that was just too harsh on those poor misunderstood miscreants.
Click to expand...

The automatic 5 year hit is the first thing the prosecutor will deal away in exchange for a guilty plea along with suspended time.
 
ken158 said:
The automatic 5 year hit is the first thing the prosecutor will deal away in exchange for a guilty plea along with suspended time.
Click to expand...

Well, there’s no suspended time federally, so there’s that. And years of actual experience with this charge tells me that the underlying offense is usually the first thing to go, with the five year mandatory staying, because the actual presence of the gun is hard to argue with, so there’s that. I’d say more, but we’re getting pretty far afield from the purposes of this particular forum. Maybe we could continue this discussion elsewhere . . .
 
I would really like to know, who wrote up this bill for Ms.Feinstein to sponsor and the others who also put their name to. This could not have possibly been written within the time period the change of political parties of this past election.

1. The list of weapons listed had to be very thoroughly researched thru.

HeeHee..One I have is not listed, does that mean I am exempt for this bill????

2. A very damning insert is the provision for gifting....Should you or I wish to gift one of the firearms that is listed, and we are grandfathered in, to one of our children, they would not be able to posses it until going thru a lic firearm dealer.


Muss, you'll have to help me out on this one...

Under this Bill, are the pintellies (SP...I'm in a hurry to type this). Are they listed in the original Bill? Or as this new Bill reads, it will be up to the courts to administer the minimum or maximum of penitally (sp again)). I did not see any listede on reference to title 18-924.


WuzzFuzz

Another part I see as a BIG can of worms, just how is the gov going to possibly know whether I gave a grandfathered weapon to my son or daughter after the effective date of this bill, (if it does go thru)..or did I give it to them for their birthday....last year....

Another little glitch...some of you are retired LEO's such as I am...Did your organization issue you your side arm, or did you have to buy your own? If you bought your own to be in accordance with your organization's requirement...And it has a capacity of more than 10 rounds of ammo, then when you retired, you kept your weapon.....I doubt if too many organizations would gift you the side arm when you retired.....

But if your organization had one of the weapons listed, and gifted it to you, then you are good to go, providing you retired in good standing.:D
 
Last edited:
WuzzFuzz said:
Muss, you'll have to help me out on this one...

Under this Bill, are the pintellies (SP...I'm in a hurry to type this). Are they listed in the original Bill? Or as this new Bill reads, it will be up to the courts to administer the minimum or maximum of penitally (sp again)). I did not see any listede on reference to title 18-924.


WuzzFuzz
Click to expand...

This bill has nothing to do with 18 USC 924(c). I was responding to the unrelated and misinformed discussion, which often occurs on threads of substance, about issues totally unrelated to this bill. As we are still very far afield of the allowed 2nd Amendment Forum discussion, we should continue this in another thread . . .
 
These are gonna be coming fast and furious. Just keep throwing them against the wall till something sticks. It makes you sick, but we can only do what we can do. Support the organizations that will make our voices heard and the ramifications known. It is ironic that it has been established that gun control is a negative for the party that introduces it. It ignites the resistance much more than it satisfies the supporters, so in effect it is a loser of an issue. Kind of a poke the bear scenario. If the AWB passes there will be a lot of felons overnight. Take solace in knowing the prosecution of the newly minted "criminals" will go to the front of the line as examples.
 
Old Corp said:
STILL find it interesting that no one 'on the hill' seems particularly interested in the concept of putting real teeth into gun violence convictions.
I.E. - coming down HARD on actual criminals.

How about - no plea bargaining, no probation, LONG sentences, no 'good time', no parole. Actually address the CRIMINAL element?
But - realize this may have a detrimental effect on votes from 'the constituency'.

So - let's just place the bootheel on law abiding Americans instead.
Click to expand...

They just need to use the existing laws and refuse to bargain, and go for EVERY violation. And stop concurrent sentencing. What a joke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
State v Wilson….Hawaii
Replies
15
Views
2K
Racer X
R
R
Miller v Bonta ruling CA AWB ruled unconstitutional
Replies
3
Views
666
ladder13
L
R
prelim injunction California SB2 sensative places
Replies
3
Views
1K
ISCS Yoda
ISCS Yoda
D
Judge Voids California Background Check w/ Ammo Purchases
Replies
8
Views
985
Walter Rego
W
T
  • Locked
Our Founding Fathers' perspective on private gun ownership.
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
s&wchad
s&wchad

Latest posts

Back
Top