PDA

View Full Version : Top Democrat will seek new gun law in next Congress


Rambo, John J.
12-16-2012, 7:51 AM
Top Democrat will seek new gun law in next Congress

By Michael O'Brien, NBC News

Friday's school shooting in Connecticut appeared to prompt a renewed effort by lawmakers to curb gun rights, as a top Democrat vowed Sunday to introduce new legislation on the first day of the new Congress next year.

The massacre at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn. which left 28 dead, including 20 students, seven adults and the suspected shooter has led proponents of gun control to redouble their efforts to seek new regulations. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an outspoken advocate of gun control, said the issue should now be atop President Barack Obama's second term agenda.

To that end, California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D, said she intended to introduce a gun control bill on the first day of the next Congress. Paired with a twin version in the House, Feinstein's law would take aim at limiting the sale, transfer and possession of assault weapons, along with the capacity of high-capacity magazines.

It can be done," she said on NBC's "Meet the Press." The senator, a proponent of gun control, said she expected Obama to offer his public support for the law.

A federal ban on assault weapons, first passed in 1994 and signed by President Bill Clinton, expired in 2004. And while Obama has said he favors its reinstatement, the administration has hardly thrown its weight behind such a proposal during his first term.

The especially grisly shooting in Connecticut which follows several other high-profile shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colo. or outside a Sikh temple in Wisconsin might now serve as a catalyzing moment in that dormant gun debate.

"We're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics," Obama himself said on Friday in the aftermath of the Newtown shooting.

Outspoken proponents of gun control, like Bloomberg, have now begun to pressure the president to speak out more forcefully on the issue.

"It's time for the president to stand up and lead and tell this country what we should do," said the New York City mayor. "This should be his No. 1 agenda."

There are indications that some of the most commonly discussed measures to rein in weapons enjoy some degree of public support. An early August CNN/ORC poll, conducted in the aftermath of the Colorado and Wisconsin shootings, found varying levels of public support for different gun control proposals. Fifty-seven percent of adults, for instance, said they favored a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of assault weapons, and 60 percent said they supported a ban on the possession of high-capacity ammunition clips.

But gun owners' groups, like the National Rifle Association, could prove a significant political obstacle to moving any such proposals through Congress. The NRA which endorsed Obama's Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, during the presidential campaign remains a formidable political force. The group could target, for instance, Democrats from rural or centrist districts and states for defeat if they were to vote for such a law.

Bloomberg argued otherwise. "There is this myth that the NRA is so powerful," he said. "Today the NRA's power is so vastly overrated."

In the meantime, the mayor said, Obama could take action through executive orders to strengthen and update the background check system and more aggressively enforce existing laws.

On Sunday, the president will travel on Sunday to Newtown to comfort victims' families and thank first responders for their efforts. Obama will also speak at a vigil this evening.



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Here's the latest info from your usual "favorites" on their action items that you knew could/would happen with the latest tragedy.

taperxz
12-16-2012, 7:59 AM
This has been going on since DiFI has been a Senator. Every other word out of her mouth has been "oh and the gun ban i will introduce"

Nothing new here, Won't pass the house and probably not even the senate.

Yes! even after the Conn. tragedy.

donw
12-16-2012, 8:19 AM
it is nothing new...but this time, i believe they will pursue it farther regardless.

with a 'super-majority' of dems in California state legislature, do you honestly believe ANY anti-gun bill will NOT pass?

DiFi has her hat handed to her on more than one occasion about gun control; but she will NOT give in.

these horrendous event such as Aurora and Ct are nothing more than fuel for the anti's...we all know and understand it. we all know and understand it WILL get harder if things like those continue.

there are many arguments about CCW's being a valuable tool for events such as these. valid? maybe...maybe not. all the "Good" statistics may be recited but many, if not most, legislators fail to recognize, admit, agree with or support them.

insofar as is known, there is no way to "Predict" what ANYONE will do at any given time is there? so they (the legislators) attack the tools available. does that seem sensible?

irrational legislators seek rational answers for irrational events...

donw
12-16-2012, 8:20 AM
it is nothing new...but this time, i believe they will pursue it farther regardless.

with a 'super-majority' of dems in California state legislature, do you honestly believe ANY anti-gun bill will NOT pass?

DiFi has her hat handed to her on more than one occasion about gun control; but she will NOT give in.

these horrendous event such as Aurora and Ct are nothing more than fuel for the anti's...we all know and understand it. we all know and understand it WILL get harder if things like those continue.

there are many arguments about CCW's being a valuable tool for events such as these. valid? maybe...maybe not. all the "Good" statistics may be recited but many, if not most, legislators fail to recognize, admit, agree with or support them.

insofar as is known, there is no way to "Predict" what ANYONE will do at any given time is there? so they (the legislators) attack the tools available. does that seem sensible?

irrational legislators seek rational answers for irrational events...

Clownpuncher
12-16-2012, 8:29 AM
In the meantime, the mayor said, Obama could take action through executive orders to strengthen and update the background check system and more aggressively enforce existing laws.



I know I'll probably be banished from the kingdom for agreeing with this idiot Bloomberg but the highlighted portion is all that needs to happen. Of course the Feds would have to stop breaking the federal gun laws as well.

Jack L
12-16-2012, 8:33 AM
I read some repubicans agree with DF. To be safe, I'd buy one now just in case. Better safe than left without.

RRangel
12-16-2012, 8:34 AM
it is nothing new...but this time, i believe they will pursue it farther regardless.

with a 'super-majority' of dems in California state legislature, do you honestly believe ANY anti-gun bill will NOT pass?

DiFi has her hat handed to her on more than one occasion about gun control; but she will NOT give in.

these horrendous event such as Aurora and Ct are nothing more than fuel for the anti's...we all know and understand it. we all know and understand it WILL get harder if things like those continue.

there are many arguments about CCW's being a valuable tool for events such as these. valid? maybe...maybe not. all the "Good" statistics may be recited but many, if not most, legislators fail to recognize, admit, agree with or support them.

insofar as is known, there is no way to "Predict" what ANYONE will do at any given time is there? so they (the legislators) attack the tools available. does that seem sensible?

irrational legislators seek rational answers for irrational events...

Why does a super majority matter for gun control in California? That has never stopped them. The fact is that new gun control doesn't make it through the U.S. legislature because there are not enough votes. Unlike in California even without any super majority.

Calplinker
12-16-2012, 8:36 AM
it is nothing new...but this time, i believe they will pursue it farther regardless.

with a 'super-majority' of dems in California state legislature, do you honestly believe ANY anti-gun bill will NOT pass?

DiFi has her hat handed to her on more than one occasion about gun control; but she will NOT give in.

...

You are confusing the U.S. Senate, where DiFi is a member with the California assembly, where she is not a member.

Two entirely different things. We will definitely see new gun bills from the California legislature, but nothing meaningfully harmful to us will pass through the Republican controlled House of Representatives in Washington.

This too shall pass

donw
12-16-2012, 9:00 AM
You are confusing the U.S. Senate, where DiFi is a member with the California assembly, where she is not a member.

Two entirely different things. We will definitely see new gun bills from the California legislature, but nothing meaningfully harmful to us will pass through the Republican controlled House of Representatives in Washington.

This too shall pass

sorry for the confusion...i'm aware of who DiFi is, where she is, and where and who is in the California state legislature.

i wished to compare the two in their similarities and should have pointed that out.

incidentally...IMO, they will, at least, get a high capacity magazine/clip ban...at the federal level.

pMcW
12-16-2012, 9:01 AM
I read some repubicans agree with DF. To be safe, I'd buy one now just in case. Better safe than left without.

And if they ban possession?

56Chevy
12-16-2012, 9:09 AM
I read some repubicans agree with DF. To be safe, I'd buy one now just in case. Better safe than left without.
I've even heard supposedly pro-2A people say "something needs to be done.". Just a few "moderate" Republicans with that thinking could be bad for us.

J.D.Allen
12-16-2012, 9:10 AM
You are confusing the U.S. Senate, where DiFi is a member with the California assembly, where she is not a member.

Two entirely different things. We will definitely see new gun bills from the California legislature, but nothing meaningfully harmful to us will pass through the Republican controlled House of Representatives in Washington.

This too shall pass

I agree with you, but unfortunately this type of thing is just going to continue to happen unless they do something about the security and mental health aspects of this. I wonder how many more we can endure...

Jack L
12-16-2012, 9:20 AM
And if they ban possession?

DF says it would not be retroactive in her bill. Not many new firearm laws are. But anything is possible in CA.

"It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession, not retroactively, but prospectively," and ban the sale of clips of more than ten bullets, Feinstein said. "The purpose of this bill is to get... weapons of war off the streets."

M1Kev
12-16-2012, 9:24 AM
DF says it would not be retroactive in her bill. Not many new firearm laws are. But anything is possible in CA.

"It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession, not retroactively, but prospectively," and ban the sale of clips of more than ten bullets, Feinstein said. "The purpose of this bill is to get... weapons of war off the streets."

Good thing my clips for the M1 only hold 8, the rest of what I have are magazines...:D

M1Kev
12-16-2012, 9:27 AM
One thing I have always wondered; where did the number 10 come from for magazines? Is it a magical number where magazines that hold 10 or less are less lethal or did some lib nutjob just arbitrarily pull that number out of their blowhole?

email
12-16-2012, 9:30 AM
Feinstein is gun salesperson runner up of the year.

http://www.riflegear.com/c-94-stripped-lower-receivers.aspx

Jack L
12-16-2012, 9:32 AM
One thing I have always wondered; where did the number 10 come from for magazines? Is it a magical number where magazines that hold 10 or less are less lethal or did some lib nutjob just arbitrarily pull that number out of their blowhole?

I guess they thought people are poor shots and only a few rounds would find their mark if you only had 10? 10 now, 5 next, 0 after that. Beware.

M1Kev
12-16-2012, 9:33 AM
I guess they thought people are poor shots and only a few rounds would find their mark if you only had 10? 10 now, 5 next, 0 after that. Beware.

QFT

dieselpower
12-16-2012, 9:36 AM
I know I'll probably be banished from the kingdom for agreeing with this idiot Bloomberg but the highlighted portion is all that needs to happen. Of course the Feds would have to stop breaking the federal gun laws as well.

Yes agree we need stiffer penalties surrounding gun crime, but liberals onl say that to gain support from us...they don't really want that since liberals believe in criminal's rights.

My law... Commit and crime with a firearm, LIFE IN PRISON WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE...PERIOD, END OF YOUR LIFE, JUST SHOOT YOURSELF BEFORE YOU ARE CAPTURED.

Then take all those prison tapes showing inmates gang raping other inmates, and show them in high school.

Toss a few 16 year old gang bangers into prison and tape the festivities of that kid... then show the friends of that kid what happened to him... let them watch him being forced to give oral sex to guys or have forced anal sex with 3 or more guys a day...watch the gun crime rate drop like a freaking rock in that community. Rinse and repeat in every community... problem solved.

Of course there is no real solution to a wacko shooting up a movie theater or school. Its just a tragic event. If not a gun, they would steal a car and run over kids at the bus stop, or walk into a daycare with a baseball bat.

Taking away their choice of a deadly weapon doesn't take away the desire to commit a deadly act.

Scott Connors
12-16-2012, 9:43 AM
One thing I have always wondered; where did the number 10 come from for magazines? Is it a magical number where magazines that hold 10 or less are less lethal or did some lib nutjob just arbitrarily pull that number out of their blowhole?

Bill Ruger, of all people, suggested restricting magazine capacity to ten rounds as an alternative to an "AW" ban. Naturally the antis embraced this in addition to banning "AW"s. Lesson: compromise is not possible with the antis: they interpret it as "we'll take wha we can get now and get the rest latter."

glocksmith
12-16-2012, 9:44 AM
I'll agree to an AWB when congress agrees to 4 year term limits and is forced to obey their own legislation, i.e Obama-Care.

That's my deal.

glocksmith
12-16-2012, 9:44 AM
I'll agree to an AWB when congress agrees to 4 year term limits and is forced to obey their own legislation, i.e Obama-Care.

That's my deal.

tbhracing
12-16-2012, 9:47 AM
Tagged and tired of this crap,

surfish95747
12-16-2012, 9:49 AM
So, if I have an AR lower (which is NOT an assault weapon), and the AW ban is re-introduced, will that lower be able to be transferred to somebody else? Or when the language talks about no prospective transfers, does that include no transfers of grandfathered lowers?

five.five-six
12-16-2012, 9:49 AM
And if they ban possession?


http://i411.photobucket.com/albums/pp191/jonjohns65/nra_heston.jpg

GM4spd
12-16-2012, 9:52 AM
Lesson: compromise is not possible with the antis: they interpret it as "we'll take wha we can get now and get the rest latter."

Great way to put it because it is happening exactly that way. pete

RRangel
12-16-2012, 10:17 AM
Let's not get in a panic here. I'll reiterate that there isn't enough votes in the U.S. legislature. Today we even have an incorporated individual right to keep and bear arms in the Second Amendment. It doesn't mean we should rest easy so make sure you stay politically active.

Guntech
12-16-2012, 10:41 AM
I've even heard supposedly pro-2A people say "something needs to be done.". Just a few "moderate" Republicans with that thinking could be bad for us.

And we all know what the politicians motto is: "think of the next election". All of this talk of the RNC being more "inclusive" after Romneys loss could mean more liberal *** kissing in hopes of preserving their political career.

Shoot'nPlumber
12-16-2012, 10:42 AM
Am i missing something here...dianne feinstein is going the reintroduce a bill banning all assault weapons in a state where the ban is still in effect...isnt that why we have to have bullet buttons so even with an AW ban we could still keep and use our California sporting rifles?

RMP91
12-16-2012, 10:49 AM
Does this have any "realistic" chance of passing? Even after this shooting?

I don't think so, it won't even come close...

ramathorn
12-16-2012, 11:02 AM
Everytime they bring up a weapons ban there ends up being thousands more purchased because they mentioned it. This is probably why AK-Builder is almost out of stock today. Come on guys, save some for the rest of us. ;)

Casey
12-16-2012, 11:05 AM
Good luck with that. Even if they passed an "assault weapon" ban the high court may have something to say about that since they already said you can not ban weapons in common use.
This crap still needs to be resisted. The only way they will get traction with this kind of legislation is with support of gun owners. Don'T be one of them that says "something MUST be done" unless it involves the real problem... regulating crazy people.

IVC
12-16-2012, 11:46 AM
Unlike 1994, there is Heller now. An AW ban calculation has changed from "all we need is the political will" to "we need the political will AND a proof that it will work." Well, the 1994-2004 AW ban is now a huge liability - it has proven that the AW ban is NOT effective in affecting crime.

wjc
12-16-2012, 11:54 AM
Let's not get in a panic here. I'll reiterate that there isn't enough votes in the U.S. legislature. Today we even have an incorporated individual right to keep and bear arms in the Second Amendment. It doesn't mean we should rest easy so make sure you stay politically active.

Good point. Definitely stay active....stay informed.

Unfortunately, no matter what, the anti's are going to continue their policy of chipping away at the 2A till they get the bans they want.

We need to fight everything they propose.

S470FM
12-16-2012, 12:15 PM
we should all start having flintlock build parties.

holy crap

M1Kev
12-16-2012, 12:33 PM
Bill Ruger, of all people, suggested restricting magazine capacity to ten rounds as an alternative to an "AW" ban. Naturally the antis embraced this in addition to banning "AW"s. Lesson: compromise is not possible with the antis: they interpret it as "we'll take wha we can get now and get the rest latter."

Thanks, I got into the gun world a little late, it was not until 2010 that I became an enthusiast.

RT13
12-16-2012, 12:53 PM
The most important part and concern for me is being able to pass on my guns to my son. But then again, our AR's are not AW since they have bb's, at least for now. DF wants the rest of the country to be like CA.

Mike's Custom
12-16-2012, 12:57 PM
Why pass more gun laws to restrict law abiding citizens? They school shooter killed his mother and stole her legally purchased firearms ( as so far reported) so how would any law change that? He used handguns and and not AWs although it was reported he had a AR.

wjc
12-16-2012, 1:00 PM
Why pass more gun laws to restrict law abiding citizens? They school shooter killed his mother and stole her legally purchased firearms ( as so far reported) so how would any law change that? He used handguns and and not AWs although it was reported he had a AR.

It won't

It's an opportunity for the anti's to push their agenda.

Librarian
12-16-2012, 1:22 PM
Pleas see the sticky http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=641207