Gunco Forums banner

FEINSTINES BILL 1-3- 2013

4K views 30 replies 18 participants last post by  2ndAmendican 
#1 ·
FROM THE NRA IM TOLD IN A EMAIL I GOT





Feinstein Goes For Broke With New Gun-Ban Bill




Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)—author of the federal “assault weapon” and “large” ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004—has announced that on the first day of the new Congress—January 3rd— she will introduce a bill to which her 1994 ban will pale by comparison. On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, “I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012.

According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein’s website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of “assault weapon” that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners. Some of the changes in Feinstein’s new bill are as follows:

· Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms. The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.

· Adopts new lists of prohibited external features. For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the “pistol grip” of which “protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon,” the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any “grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” Also, the new bill adds “forward grip” to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as “a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.” Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban.


· Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein’s 1994 ban listed “grenade launcher” as one of the prohibiting features for rifles. Her 2013 bill carries goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing “rocket launcher.” Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban. Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add “nuclear bomb,” “particle beam weapon,” or something else equally far-fetched to the features list.




· Expands the definition of “assault weapon” by including:


· Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1944 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS.


· Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” except for tubular-magazine .22s.


· Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches,” any “semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel.

· Requires owners of existing “assault weapons” to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.


· Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.” Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.


· Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect. Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.


· Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.” Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.

· Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.”



The Department of Justice study. On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders. To the contrary, this is what the study said: “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders. Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995. . . . However, with only one year of post-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban. Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously.”


“Assault weapon” numbers and murder trends. From the imposition of Feinstein’s “assault weapon” ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of “assault weapons” has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an “assault weapon” is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE’s firearm manufacturer reports, available here. From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s—all models of which Feinstein’s new bill defines as “assault weapons”—rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation’s murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type.





Traces: Feinstein makes several claims, premised on firearm traces, hoping to convince people that her 1994 ban reduced the (relatively infrequent) use of “assault weapons” in crime. However, traces do not indicate how often any type of gun is used in crime. As the Congressional Research Service and the BATFE have explained, not all firearms that are traced have been used in crime, and not all firearms used in crime are traced. Whether a trace occurs depends on whether a law enforcement agency requests that a trace be conducted. Given that existing “assault weapons” were exempted from the 1994 ban and new “assault weapons” continued to be made while the ban was in effect, any reduction in the percentage of traces accounted for by “assault weapons” during the ban, would be attributable to law enforcement agencies losing interest in tracing the firearms, or law enforcement agencies increasing their requests for traces on other types of firearms, as urged by the BATFE for more than a decade.


Call Your U.S. Senators and Representative: As noted, Feinstein intends to introduce her bill on January 3rd. President Obama has said that gun control will be a “central issue” of his final term in office, and he has vowed to move quickly on it.



Contact your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 gun and magazine ban. Our elected representatives in Congress must here from you if we are going to defeat this gun ban proposal. You can write your Representatives and Senators by using our Write Your Representatives tool here: NRA-ILA | Write Your Reps

Millions of Americans own so-called “assault weapons” and tens of millions own “large” magazines, for self-defense, target shooting, and hunting. For more information about the history of the “assault weapon” issue, please visit Home Page.
 
See less See more
#3 ·
IF PASSED WERE THE HELL WILL I GET $200 PER GUN THAT FITS THOSE DESCRIPTIONS????????? HELL EVEN ONE OF MY 10-22 RUGERS FITS THE DESCRIPTION.
IM NOT SURE WERE MY THUMBHOLE 10-22 TARGET STOCK COME INTO PLAY.




BANNING M1 CARBINES THEY HAVE NO EVIL FEATURES NO PISTOL GRIPS.

ILL NEED A LOT OF MONEY TO REGISTER THEM. AT $ 200 EACH.
CANT TRANFER THEM AN FORFET WHEN YOU DIE????? NEED PERMISSION TO TAKE OUT OF STATE THERE GOES MY VARMINT HUNTING .

HOW MANY VARMINT AN TARGET ARS ARE OUT THERE BING USED IN COMPITIION A FOR HUNTING???????????????????????????
 
#6 ·
Is this why so many new forum members around the web looking to bend flats again?? Seems like a re awakening of kit building /assembling lately.
 
#7 ·
So, we must get a TAX stamp for all guns now?
NOPE JUST THE 900 PLUS ON HER LIST PLUS ANYTHING ELSE THAT FITS THE DESCRIPTION ON HERE LIST. SHE LEAVIN PUMPS, LEVER,BOLT ACTIONS OUT OF IT. IF THE BILL PASSES IN A FEW YEARS WHEN CRIMINAL ARE USING SHOT GUNS AN DEER RILFES SHE WIULL WRITE A BILL SAYNG THERE TOW DANGERIOUS AN THEN THERE WILL LIKELY BE SOME AMMO LAWS COMING. HOW LONG BEFORE THEY BAN HAND LOADING ?????????

WE MIGHT BE SEEING A FEW AK PUMP ACTION CONVERSIONS IN THE FUTURE
 
#8 ·
One more communist Supreme court judge and it's over anyhow....
And don't think Barry will ever leave office without that happening.....

So yeah write all the letters you can, but try to enjoy life a bit too. Because it's allready too late to save the U.S. in our lifetimes.
These fucking pinko *** hippies have been setting the table for fifty years .
The schools are loaded
The courts are loaded
The media is loaded & the God Damned Republicans can not even field a decent candidate.

Write a fucking letter....yeah right......
 
#9 ·
Is this why so many new forum members around the web looking to bend flats again?? Seems like a re awakening of kit building /assembling lately.
IF THOSE KITS DONT GET BUILT YOU CANT HAVE THEM READY TO REGISTER OR GRAND FATHER IN,

THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF UNBUILT KITS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE LEGA;LY WORTH A SHIT IF THESE LAWS PASS.

YOU MIGHT BE ABALE TO BUILD A PUMP OUT OF THEM. IMY GUESS IS THEY WILL SOME HOW BAN ANY THING WITH A RECIVER THAT CAN BE SEMI AUTO ALSO ID NOT BE SUPRISED TO SEE NDS AN OTHER 100% RECIVERS ON A LIST
 
#10 ·
I doubt if it went thru that they would make you bring every gun in and have it inspected for function. Your proabably talking about a bunch of clerks just taking peoples money and assigning numbers. And again taking more of our money, since even the political folks this would be just a touchy feel good thing that doesnt really do anything.
You would think if these political types really cared, isnt it a fact that each day over 30 people (children included) die from alcohol related car crashes? These folks fail to mention that. But then again there is just tooo much money involved with the folks that distill and brew alcohol to offend them. So go after the evil gun owners. jim
 
#12 ·
Too much stress. I'm glad I got rid of all my kits & guns. I'm going to fly kites & paint unicorns. Maybe join a commune & live in a yurt.
 
#14 ·
With the NFA thing it all seems like just one big tax scheme.

It doesn't make any sense if people have to pay $200 to keep their gun as an NFA item then no guns are coming off the street (speaking about legal gun owners like ourselves of course).

When you die wouldn't you be able to transfer the weapons to your heirs if you set up a trust?

Even more confused as to how this is going to make things safer in this country. Trust me, I'm opposed to the whole idea, but hearing that the government is going to get a big payday out of this sounds like a bribe of sorts.

"We'll let you keep your guns, but pay up".
 
#15 ·
I dont want to pay the NFA costs per gun so I just sold all mine to some weird looking dude on the street. He said he had big plans for them with his "bangger" friends. Must be part of a drum corp. Im glad he can use them. :)
 
#22 ·
#18 ·
Does this non transfer at death seem pretty stupid to everyone here? Say a guy has cancer and knows he's got a few months on this lovely ball. Is this guy going to worry about turning in his evil assault weapons to the govt who is probably responsible for his health care bill going thru the roof and copays? NO. This guy is probably going to find someone in the family or some friends that also have evil assualt weapons and give them to them for safe keeping until the people comes to thier senses and votes these idiots out of office. Lets say a person with a terminal illness needed free health care. Why not take one of these evil guns and advertise it on craigslist and get himself arrested. the guy knows he's dying anyway why not let the govt give him free health care in the end?
Im sure there will be alot of gun collectors that would be more than happy to adopt these untranferable guns for safe keeping if this ever comes to pass. I wonder how many vet bring backs are still floating around that never got registered back in the day. Or as car guys selling cars without papers, "sold as a parts car" jim
 
#19 ·
I recently had bladder cancer surgery & the ONLY thing I cared about was GOING HOME!! I'd much rather die in my comfy recliner at home than staying in a freezing cold & lonely hospital.
The guns, kits , hobbies , and the like did not even register on my importance scale.
Now I'm home & feeling decent, things turn back around & I'm back to buying tins of ammo & odball kits I don't have.

Getting old brings choices to make that never crossed my mind when young & healthy.


Even thought of selling the farm & moving closer to medical care.
But not for long....Heh....Heh
 
#27 ·
Heard her on the radio the other day saying the ar-15 is not used for hunting and no hunter worth his salt would use such a rifle for hunting. WHAT REALLY And these are the people that are going to be writing the laws concerning firearms. God help us.

GUN OWNERS SEEM TO HAVE FAILED IN SHOWING HOW THEY USE ARS AN OTHER GUNS FOR HUNTING.

YEA YEA I KNOW WE DONT NEED TO.

ID LOVE TO SEE MORE PICTURES AN VIDEOS OF ARS, AN AKS USED FOR HUNTING AN EVEN SHOOTING TARGETS . MY KID HUNTED WITH A AK FOR THE FIRST TWO YOUTH SEASONS WHEN HE WAS 10 AN 11 . VERY VERY SUPERVISED ILL GET A PIC POSTED . I HELPED A FATHER BUILD HIS SON A AK SPORTER FOR HUNTING AN GUYS HERE SENT STUFF FOR THE BUILD.
THESE KIDS DO THER HOE WORK AN DONT SCREW UP PR THYE WILL NEVER SHOOOT AGAIN.

IM PLANING ON SENDING A FEW PICS OF US HUNTING DEER WITH OUR AKS TO OUR LAW MAKERS.

THEY LOVE TO SAY THERE IS NO LEGITIMATE USE. UNFORTUNATLY THERE ARE ABOUT 500 BUMP FIRING VIDEOS TO EVERY HUNTING OR EVEN TARGET SHOOTING VIDEO.
 
#29 ·
from her own site this is a little differant from wht the NRA is claiming.. its also differant from what she said in meet the press.

In January, Senator Feinstein will introduce a bill to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices.

To receive updates on this legislation, click here.

Press releases

Feinstein to Introduce Updated Assault Weapons Bill in New Congress, December 17, 2012
Feinstein Statement on Connecticut School Shooting, December 14, 2012

Television appearances

Press conference, Dec. 21, 2012
CNN’s Piers Morgan Tonight, Nov. 17, 2012
PBS NewsHour with Gwen Ifill, Nov. 17, 2012
MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports, Nov. 17, 2012
CBS’s Meet the Press with David Gregory, Nov. 16, 2012

Summary of 2013 legislation

Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation:

Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
120 specifically-named firearms;
Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics; and
Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.
Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test;
Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test; and
Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans.
Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment;
Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes; and
Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons.
Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
Background check of owner and any transferee;
Type and serial number of the firearm;
Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration.

A pdf of the bill summary is available here.
Effectiveness of 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban

Following are studies that have been conducted on the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban:

In a Department of Justice study (pdf), Jeffrey Roth and Christopher Koper find that the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was responsible for a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders, holding all other factors equal. They write: “Assault weapons are disproportionately involved in murders with multiple victims, multiple wounds per victim, and police officers as victims.”
Original source (page 2): Jeffrey A. Roth & Christopher S. Koper, “Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994,” The Urban Institute (March 1997).
In a University of Pennsylvania study (pdf), Christopher Koper reports that the use of assault weapons in crime declined by more than two-thirds by about nine years after 1994 Assault Weapons Ban took effect.
Original source (page 46): Christopher S. Koper, “An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003” (June 2004).
In a Washington Post story, reporters David Fallis and James Grimaldi write that the percentage of firearms seized by police in Virginia with high-capacity magazines dropped significantly during the Assault Weapons Ban. That figure has doubled since the ban expired.
Original source: In Virginia, high-yield clip seizures rise. By David S. Fallis and James V. Grimaldi, Washington Post.
In a letter to the editor in the American Journal of Public Health (pdf), Douglas Weil and Rebecca Knox explain that when Maryland imposed a more stringent ban on assault pistols and high-capacity magazines in 1994, it led to a 55 percent drop in assault pistols recovered by the Baltimore Police Department.
Original source (pages 297-298): Douglas S. Weil & Rebecca C. Knox, "Letter to the Editor, The Maryland Ban on the Sale of Assault Pistols and High-Capacity Magazines: Estimating the Impact in Baltimore," 87 American Journal of Public Health 2, Feb. 1997, at 297-98.
A recent study by the Violence Policy Center finds that between 2005 and 2007, one in four law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty was killed with an assault weapon.
Original source (pages 6-7): Violence Policy Center, "Target: Law Enforcement—Assault Weapons in the News," (Feb. 2010).
A report by the Police Executive Research Forum finds that 37 percent of police departments reported seeing a noticeable increase in criminals’ use of assault weapons since the Assault Weapons Ban expired.
Original source (page 2): Police Executive Research Forum, "Guns and Crime: Breaking New Ground by Focusing on the Local Impact," (May 2010).

Assault weapons in the news

"A Tougher Assault Weapons Ban" (New York Times, Dec. 28, 2012)
"NRA misleads on assault weapons" (Salon, Dec. 26, 2012)
"Dems to push for more sweeping assault weapons ban" (Washington Post, Dec. 20, 2012)
"A conservative case for an assault weapons ban" (Los Angeles Times, Dec. 20, 2012)
"Obama Vows Fast Action in New Push for Gun Control" (New York Times, Dec. 19, 2012)
"Trying, again, to ban assault weapons" (Los Angeles Times, Dec. 17, 2012)
"Stop the sale of assault weapons" (San Francisco Chronicle, Dec. 17, 2012)
"Reason to Hope After the Newtown Rampage" (New York Times, Dec. 17, 2012)
 
#30 ·
you should not be required to show how you use your AK or ar--

it dies not matter if you hunt with them or not --the 2nd is not about hunting it is about excessive government control over the citizens.

the question really is --are we to remain citizens or are we to become SUBJECTS ???

and subjects is what we will be IF we lose our 2n rights. after the second is de-fanged wanna bet they go after the 1st?
 
#31 ·
you should not be required to show how you use your AK or ar--

it dies not matter if you hunt with them or not --the 2nd is not about hunting it is about excessive government control over the citizens.

the question really is --are we to remain citizens or are we to become SUBJECTS ???

and subjects is what we will be IF we lose our 2n rights. after the second is de-fanged wanna bet they go after the 1st?

As has been stated a million times "Gun control isn't about guns, it's about CONTROL." You can bet your sweet arse that the First Amendment will fall soon after the Second.

I have sold all of my guns and parts kits, but theoretically if I didn't, I still wouldn't turn in or report a damn thing. With the stroke of a pen the government will make a few million law abiding citizens into criminals.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top