Ask Me Help Desk - Dems new gun grab

Dems new gun grab

There is a new 100 page bill working it's way rapidly through Congress that would place a ban on semi-automatic guns. They want to pass it before the end of August. It is now in the Judiciary Committee.
Democrats push for 1st semi-automatic gun ban in 20 years | AP News (archive.ph)

Text - H.R.1808 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Assault Weapons Ban of 2021 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress (archive.ph)

The bill defines “semiautomatic weapon” as a semiautomatic rifle, pistol or shotgun that has “a magazine that is not a fixed magazine,” a pistol grip or forward grip, or a “folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.” The legislation would also ban guns that can fire over 10 rounds and that have a threaded barrel or second pistol grip. (Section 2 Definitions)

The toad Jerry Nadler is unambiguous about the goals .

Rep Bishop: "Is there any Democrat that would dispute that this bill would ban weapons that are in common use?"
Nadler: "That's the point of the bill."
Rep Bishop: "So it is the point of the bill to ban guns that are in common use?"
Nadler: "The problem is they are in common use."

Give the man credit for honesty . Gone is couching words like "sensible or reasonable gun laws " .

The SCOTUS Heller decision made it clear that possession of common use guns was protected by the 2nd amendment . This bill defies the court.

The bill does allow for some guns

3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any firearm that—
(A) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action ...

I'm surprised they excluded smooth bored flint lock muzzle loaders .

I looked at the text of the bill. It seems to be yet another effort to ban so-called "assault weapons", meaning semi-auto rifles that look like an M-4 or an AK. There was some mention under "definitions" of pistols which accept detachable mags. I couldn't see exactly what the bill was proposing for those pistols or, for that matter, for semi-auto shotguns.

What type of guns would you forbid?

I think where we are now is the right place.

Our problem is not a gun problem. Our problem is a moral problem.

No one needs a weapon of war.

Yes, a moral problem (ban shooting-people video games!) and a mental illness problem.

I started a new thread so as not to hijack Tom's.

Who in the US needs a semiautomatic gun?

Quote:

No one needs a weapon of war.

and yet that is exactly why the 2nd amendment was made ;to make it clear that Americans would not be disarmed by the government . December 15 ,1791 a great day in American history ...... as important as Jan 4,1776 and June 21,1788 .

Quote:

I couldn't see exactly what the bill was proposing for those pistols or, for that matter, for semi-auto shotguns.

The wording is vague enough to have you believe they would use a broad definition of what can be banned by the bill. What doess "function as a grip " mean ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

and yet that is exactly why the 2nd amendment was made

The word that is ignored is "militia". The amendment doesn't say anything about personal ownership. Plus, the situation was entirely different back then.

Quote:

The wording is vague enough to have you believe they would use a broad definition of what can be banned by the bill. What doess "function as a grip " mean ?

Those vagaries can be trouble. I get your point.

You need to learn, WG, what a militia is. It is not an organized military. It is a citizen's army and requires an armed citizenry to be in existence.

This bill will pass in the House . There are 14 Senate Republicans who voted to advance this bill to the Senate floor . There of course will be judicial challenges ;but a version of this bill will pass.

And nothing will change, especially if it is just directed towards the AR type rifles.

This just in . The House delayed voting on this until the come back from recess. There is some police funding tied to the bill that needs to be resolved .

Turns out it was the radical SQUAD type Dems that put this bill on hold. Madam Mimi has the votes to pass it . But the SQUAD radicals want measures in the bill to hold police accountable ;whatever that means . The Dems with half a brain realize that is a terrible move going into the mid-terms . They instead want a package for FUNDING police .
The SQUAD types are committed to the 'defund the police ' agenda.

Madam Mimi is going to do her arm twisting act during the recess. So called moderate Dems want to go into the elections having passed ' support your local police ' legislation .
If I can say one thing positive about the radical socialist Dems it that they have knee capped some Dem agendas that shouldve been pieces of cake to pass . The Dems have the votes to pass this unconstitutional gun ban. But the SQUAD is not into compromising their radical agenda .

And of course any talk of how to pay for this new police funding will never take place. We'll just print more money and keep walking ever farther onto the plank.

Funding is not an issue now that Joe Manchin has sold his fiscal sanity card to the Schmuckster <sarc> .

Joe Manchin and Chuck Schumer announce deal for energy and health care bill - CNNPolitics

In today's newspaper:

"...the gun industry has thrived by selling and marketing military-grade weapons to civilians, specifically targeting and playing to the insecurities of young men, while some have made thinly veiled references to white supremacist groups."

Later in rhe.article:

"Mass shootings were all but unheard — of just a few decades ago,” Marty Daniel, CEO of Daniel Defense, said, testifying remotely before the House Oversight and Reform Committee. “So what changed? Not the firearms. They are substantially the same as those manufactured over 100 years ago.”

What changed? *cough* *cough* Access to the internet and the popularity of social media, especially among young people.

Quote:

"...the gun industry has thrived by selling and marketing military-grade weapons to civilians

Flatly wrong. Military weapons, if that is what is meant, are not available to civilians.

Quote:

specifically targeting and playing to the insecurities of young men, while some have made thinly veiled references to white supremacist groups."

I'm already pretty sure I know the answer to this, but is there any documentation for this? I have somehow managed to live for 69 years and not ever notice it. Even worse, a large percentage of new gun sales are now to women. Statistics do not back up those newspaper claims.

Quote:

Demographically, gun owners are diverse. 42.2% are female and 57.8% are male. Approximately 25.4% of Blacks own firearms, 28.3% of Hispanics own firearms, 19.4% of Asians own firearms, and 34.3% of Whites own firearms.

It's a glorious day of diversity for libs!! They should all be thrilled.

2021 National Firearms Survey by William English :: SSRN

Quote:

What changed? *cough* *cough* Access to the internet and the popularity of social media, especially among young people.

Interesting idea. Not sure why that would cause such an upsurge, though. I'd throw in the demise of married moms and dads, greatly decreased church attendance, the prevalence of abortion which involves the brutal killing of the most innocent and defenseless, and movies/television which depict gun violence in ways that glorify it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Interesting idea. Not sure why that would cause such an upsurge, though.

Watch TikTok, violent or sexual YouTube videos, join and read posts on Twitter and Reddit and Instagram and Snapchat. Try not to sink into a depression.