2013 Fed S 150 Feinstein - AW ban TEXT NOW AVAILABLE

[vtabiker]

It's all a big game of chess to say the least.

[Sky_God]

A lot of good discussion on this thread, and rightfully so.

All of this is by design. This bill will fail, the POTUS knows this, and when it does he will blame those who do not want us all to be safer, blame congress for failing and then he will use executive order to place a ban more restrictive than this current bill.

After a few years this will then go to SCOTUS and they will finally have to rule on a civilian ownership of a black rifle.

[Scuba Steve33]

Originally Posted by Waffleobill

Agree 100%, we have no reason to not join. You can get a Life Membership for $1,000 (yes, I know it's expensive). However, you can sign up for their Easy Pay Life (EPL) program and pay $25 a month ($0.83 a day), or even only $25 a quarter ($0.28 a day) until it's fully paid off. There is absolutely no reason to idly stand by and wait for someone else to fight for our rights.

Not one inch!

https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/s...aignID=nranews

Originally Posted by joefrank64k

Existing Life Members can sign up others for Life Membership at $300 (or one-year for $20). You can also upgrade your Life Membership to Benefactor for $250 if you want.

https://www.nra-2013.org/

You can join as a life member for 300 bucks without having a current life member give you his information.

Check this thread: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...556869&page=15

Originally Posted by Calplinker

Her bill has a snow balls chance in he** of passing. Heck, they don't even have the votes in the Senate, let alone the House.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...ss-senate.html

Boehner's statement that the House will look at anything the Senate passes is a smart play. If Reid tables the bill and the Senate votes on it, it would give our side good ammunition in the mid term elections against any Democrat who votes for it.

Reid knows this, which is why I think he'll once again kill it in committee just like he does every year.

By some miracle, if it does get to a Senate floor vote, it will just get filibustered and there is no way they have the 60 votes needed to shut down a filibuster.

I don't even think they have the 51 needed for it to pass the Senate.

This bill is dead again this year. Let's not forget good ole DiFi introduces much the same bill every single year. It's just getting more press this time.

Hi Calplinker, I'd like to introduce you to 1994.

[sixtus]

"Put simply, we cannot allow the rights of a few to override the safety of all. That is not the America that our founding fathers envisioned. And that is not the America I want my children and grandchildren to live in."

Dianne Feinstein, Congressional Record for 1/24/2013 page S291.

Right from the horse's mouth, she said that this bill will violate your rights.

[LTP90]

Not only does she not know about gun's she doesn't know about emergency medicine either

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuyjMXXE_3c

[SwissFluCase]

I have no intent of complying. Neither should anyone else. Enough is enough.

Regards,


SwissFluCase

[rritterson]

Three things to keep in mind:

1. Letters to senators and reps are typically not read by the politicians themselves. Those duties are tasked to unpaid interns, who read them and then give the aggregated sense of what they say to someone else in the chain, like a legislative analyst tasked with this issue, or perhaps the chief of staff. They may quote a specific letter if something really stands out or if they want to use it as an example of a larger trend, but mostly what your letter does is add a tally to the 'yes' or 'no' column.

For that reason, telling Feinstein you think she is a hypocrite because she CCWs while submitting this bill doesn't really do anything productive except make you feel good. She's not going to read it, and the staff member who passes the info along is likely to say 'many people opposed it, but they were all gun nuts who think you were a hypocrite'.

Instead, I recommend writing a letter that sticks to the point and can be easily bullet pointed (no pun intended). For example: Ms. Feinstein, I am writing to let you know I oppose the bill you submitted because: (reason 1, one sentence) (reason 2, one sentence) (etc). It will stick in the minds of those reading it and will help the reader file other, more rambley, letters into the categories of the reasons you listed.

2. This bill can be amended infinite times before it passes. Pointing out stupid logical mistakes they made in which ones are banned by name just helps them fix that in a later amendment. This work is done by the analysts in the staffing offices, not by the elected officials themselves. Those would be the same people who would read this forum.

3. Virtually no Senator or Rep's mind is going to be made up based on a few oversights in the details of the bill. Instead, they are going to look at what it is trying to achieve, think about whether it might actually do that, and whether that is something worth doing. You are not going to persuade them to vote no based on a few logical flaws or because a few guns missed the ban list. It might work if there are just such an overwhelming number of them the media turns and starts calling the bill dumb, but until then focus on the big picture and not the details if you want to be convincing.

[soulska]

^
thank you sir

[violentmouse]

We need to stop trying to decipher this bill and we need to stop pointing out the bills flaws to the liberal trolls that sit on these forums and feed from it.

We need to make a stand and the only things that need to be made clear to DiFi and the other libtards is:

"NO MORE!"
"NOT ONE MORE INCH!"
"FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS!"

We need to force these people who don't know anything about firearms to back down once and for all. a public spectacle needs to be set of what will happen when an elected force opposes the will of those who elected them.

[LBDamned]

Originally Posted by violentmouse

We need to stop trying to decipher this bill and we need to stop pointing out the bills flaws to the liberal trolls that sit on these forums and feed from it.

We need to make a stand and the only things that need to be made clear to DiFi and the other libtards is:

"NO MORE!"
"NOT ONE MORE INCH!"
"FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS!"

We need to force these people who don't know anything about firearms to back down once and for all. a public spectacle needs to be set of what will happen when an elected force opposes the will of those who elected them.

^^^ exactly! We need to stop giving them Intel - let 'em stay confused.

sooner or later they will create a law against the lateral spring compressor method and the cover insert with gantry tube... once they figure those out we're screwed...

Keep 'em guessing...

[OverUnderClays]

Originally Posted by LBDamned

^^^ exactly! We need to stop giving them Intel - let 'em stay confused.

sooner or later they will create a law against the lateral spring compressor method and the cover insert with gantry tube... once they figure those out we're screwed...

Keep 'em guessing...

We need to do everything, find holes in the legislation, getting the word out, and keep up the fight to keep our firearms!

[redscare]

It might be useful to state the FBI's own statistics when contacting your representative should they happen to be on the fence and point out just how tiny of a percentage of homicides are committed with rifles (in CA, it's about 2%) and that even if literally every rifle was removed from the country, murder would drop by a negligible amount.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...ables/table-20

[garand1945]

Originally Posted by Jpach

To me, it doesn't seem to do that. I'm just saying we should really look into the new wording.

No, we don't. You are just helping them improve the bill.

Should this bill get passed in any form, we have great lawyers who will systematically attack every flaw.


We don't need to find the flaws for either side at this point.

If you find a flaw, don't point it out. If you find a really egregious flaw, then put tuck tape over your mouth and keep quite. Every flaw helps us and hurts them.

Just focus on the things that are clear to everyone in the bill. USe those to attack it. The things that are not clear, leave them lie or else the bill will become worse.



Heres the action plan.

1. Write your congressman and senators. Even DiFi and Boxer. Keep the pressure on. write weekly, call, fax, snailmail, email. Flood the channels to overflowing.

2.Loose lips sink ships.

3.Fight the bill based on restrictions of rights. Gun Rights are Civil Rights.

4. Do not think "what will i do it it passes." Make sure it won't. If there is something you want that you are afraid will be banned, buy it now. Clarifying the finer points of the law will not protect that purchase one bit. If you can't live without it, get it now at whatever price is offered.

5. Rinse, lather, repeat.

[Jaxpire]

Originally Posted by garand1945

No, we don't. You are just helping them improve the bill.

Should this bill get passed in any form, we have great lawyers who will systematically attack every flaw.


We don't need to find the flaws for either side at this point.

If you find a flaw, don't point it out. If you find a really egregious flaw, then put tuck tape over your mouth and keep quite. Every flaw helps us and hurts them.

I think you are wrong on this. This is not a California only bill, this is nationwide. Getting people who are on the fence on this upset about this bill and writing their congressman and senator is more effective than waiting for it pass and attacking it legally. In 1994 many gun owners didn't care or even supported the first AWB, why because it didn't affect them. Having more people apposed of this bill is better than worrying if it gets amended. I fail to see the logic is finding the problems and getting more people on our side such as the Glock issue, this will affect many more non-sporting rifle people. The anti-gun people are in full force spewing old data or just wrong information trying to get people to support this ban. Not talking about just helps them more.

[bsut]

The Feinstein/McCarthy gun ban bill includes Naughty and Nice lists - firearms that are called out by name. Here's one that appears on the Naughty list, and indeed it looks pretty scary.

This is a modified original .50 Browning Machine Gun, the one you remember from all the WWII movies. The TNW M2HB is a semi-automatic ONLY, belt-fed, tripod or pintle mounted rifle that fires .50 Caliber rounds that cost between $4-7.50 per bang. The whole thing weighs 84 pounds and lists for $8,600.00. With its historical interest it is popular among well-heeled target shooters, collectors, movie companies, re-enactors and military vehicle enthusiasts. No, you already can't have one in California.

Rifles generally are used in a tiny fraction of gun crimes, which are a very small fraction of crimes overall. The semi-automatic rifles on the Naughty list are even less represented in the commission of crimes, though they are (perhaps even more frequently) used in defense against crimes.

Has any criminal ever used a .50 Caliber rifle (whether bolt action, semi-auto, or select fire) in commission of a crime? [I believe the answer might be twice in the century since its invention, but I would appreciate corrections.] If you were a deranged lunatic psychopathic felon intent upon wreaking havoc in a "gun-free zone" because there's no danger to you and it's populated with soft targets, would this be your weapon of choice?

This listing demonstrates how the Feinstein/McCarthy gun ban bill has no serious intent on improving public safety, particularly in schools. The authors are "waving the bloody T-shirt" to use the media hype around recent shocking tragedies to advance their agenda of disarming responsible, law-abiding citizens.

[edwardsb]

I am going to write my Congressmen and Senators stating that the money and effort required implementing this bill would be better spent on something else. It seems crazy to dedicate so much time and money on something that accounts for so little, percentage wise, in death and crime.

I figure this argument alone will be sufficient to stop the bill if anyone is on the fence in Congress, and it doesn’t point out any flaws in the law itself.

[edwardsb]

Forgot to mention the obvious intent to limit our rights. I have included that in the letter too

[aalvidrez]

Got an email response for a representative (a Democrat) from a suburban area. A bonifide lib... Not saying who a I don't want to poison the well or make em a target from other libs. Interesting, not a DiFi answer. Interesting in that Im only seeing mention of background checks... You be the judge:
----

Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control and gun safety. I value your views, and enjoy hearing from my constituents.

I am supportive of the Second Amendment and agree that people generally should be able to own firearms for self-defense and sport. However, I strongly believe it is our responsibility to prevent those people who would use them recklessly or to break the law from getting them.

As with any other dangerous item, people who own guns must be held to the highest standards of safety especially since misuse of firearms is so often lethal. Rest assured that I will keep your views in mind should legislation involving greater regulation of firearms comes before the House of Representatives.

Thank you again for contacting me with your thoughts and concerns. It is an honor to serve you in Congress.

Sincerely,

[Dantedamean]

Originally Posted by aalvidrez

Got an email response for a representative (a Democrat) from a suburban area. A bonifide lib... Not saying who a I don't want to poison the well or make em a target from other libs. Interesting, not a DiFi answer. Interesting in that Im only seeing mention of background checks... You be the judge:
----

Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control and gun safety. I value your views, and enjoy hearing from my constituents.

I am supportive of the Second Amendment and agree that people generally should be able to own firearms for self-defense and sport. However, I strongly believe it is our responsibility to prevent those people who would use them recklessly or to break the law from getting them.

As with any other dangerous item, people who own guns must be held to the highest standards of safety especially since misuse of firearms is so often lethal. Rest assured that I will keep your views in mind should legislation involving greater regulation of firearms comes before the House of Representatives.

Thank you again for contacting me with your thoughts and concerns. It is an honor to serve you in Congress.

Sincerely,

Seems that's in line with DiFi's view, the second amendment only applies in areas I say it does.

[retiredAFcop]

Originally Posted by violentmouse

We need to stop trying to decipher this bill and we need to stop pointing out the bills flaws to the liberal trolls that sit on these forums and feed from it.

I think it's safe for us to point out that it seems to violate the 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendments, and is clearly an unconstitutional infringement ont he rights of law abiding American citizens.

We can also point out that placing restrictions on the law abiding has never proved to be an effective means of controlling the behavior of law-breakers, and that this bill fails to address the problems of violent behaviors engaged in by criminals, instead choosing to focus on inanimate objects.

Those flaws are obvious and should be trumpeted from the rooftops at every opportunity.

[retiredAFcop]

Sorry for the many replies - I just got here and am getting caught up with the thread. Thought this was better than consolidating them into a "wall of text" - especially since some responses are serious, and others are an attempt to laugh at a bad situation.

Now, to make this post relevant and helpful - in addition to contacting your legislators, make sure you contribute to organizations that will fight for your civil rights. If you feel that the NRA has fumbled lately, consider joining/donating to the Second Amendment Foundation, the California Rifle and Pistol Association, or the CalGuns Foundation.

[Ford8N]

Originally Posted by retiredAFcop

And this perception is a big reason that LEOs should not be happy about such tactics. Even if they don't see it as harming them, such laws serve to segregate members of the LE community from other citizens who share interests and goals with them, and create distrust and ill-will between citizens and police.

Yup, and it creates many problems.

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by WhiteSands

Will I be able to leave my AR's to my sons when I die?

As mrdd posted 4 minutes before your question, the official text has not yet been posted, so answering that kind of detail is not yet possible.

But I have a return question: If the answer to your question were 'yes, ARs would be inheritable', would you then post a thread in favor of the bill?

You might; can't predict what folks would do.

But in my opinion it does not matter what is in the bill. It must be opposed, just like all the other Federal and state bills inspired by gun-grabber politicians.

These bills will not be 'OK' for cowboy action shooters, will not 'benefit' duck hunters, will not 'encourage' long-range competitors.

These bills are not about their details. These bills are about crushing resistance.

[wireless]

Originally Posted by kermit315

Heard a rumor tonight that Reid wont support her ban. That tells me they dont even have the votes in the Senate.

Yeah I don't think they will be able to get the 60 votes in the senate from what I've read.

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by Librarian

But I have a return question: If the answer to your question were 'yes, ARs would be inheritable', would you then post a thread in favor of the bill?

You might; can't predict what folks would do.

But in my opinion it does not matter what is in the bill. It must be opposed, just like all the other Federal and state bills inspired by gun-grabber politicians.

These bills will not be 'OK' for cowboy action shooters, will not 'benefit' duck hunters, will not 'encourage' long-range competitors.

These bills are not about their details. These bills are about crushing resistance.

Originally Posted by WhiteSands

A CalGuns Mod now plays devils advocate on members here.

Wow.

Originally Posted by Ready_eSeVe

WTH? I'm pretty sure he meant to point out that whether the answer was favorable or unfavorable to your circumstance, it shouldn't change your opposition to the bill.

Anyway, gift em to your children now. No paperwork would follow them (this changes next year IIRC).

Exactly.

It does not matter what is in the bill unless some provision is so much to your liking you would encourage your representatives to vote for the bill. Since I hope no one is so narrowly focused that s/he would support any of these bad bills, there is no point in worrying exactly what may be in them - until one should be sent to the President for signature.

[bomb_on_bus]

From what I saw yesterday on CSPAN it doesn't look good for Feinstein and her AWB.

Her AWB failed the first time and now at least everyone knows it. The senate hearing at least confirmed that any outright gun grab is going to be a lot tougher than previously thought.

Feinstein was talking about the bump fire stock which allows the shooter to "fire 400-800 rounds allowing for multiple rounds to be fired from one pull of the trigger" Well if thats the case that would make the gun a machine gun and be highly illegal nation wide.

Then she talked about how you can accessories the AR to make it more accurate and deadly.............. Really? The gun is as accurate as its going to be even with accessories. What makes it better are better components that can affect accuracy. Barrel, ammunition, free floating barrel, etc can increase accuracy not a pistol grip, red dot sight or anything else she was hinting at.

She really lost it when she talked about how the bullets travel really fast and are capable of causing tremendous trauma to little people.......... I'm sure she was referring to kids and Sandy Hook, although I could be wrong. On the same note I sure in the hell glad she isn't aware of larger calibers out there. I mean she is convinced that the .223 round is the deadliest round on the market. Even though its on of the weaker side of the rifle world. Things like the .300WM .338 Lapua .375Cheytac, .50BMG/DTC are bigger and have a whole hell of a lot more wallop than the .223 round. Others at least are aware of this and see Feinstein as someone with an outdated agenda who is unaware of what she is pushing for.

She has even lost support here in Kommiefornia so hopefully she won't reign supreme too much longer.

[bsut]

TTAG has some good comments about the illogic of HRH's Naughty and Nice lists.

[HKMadness]

Originally Posted by bomb_on_bus

From what I saw yesterday on CSPAN it doesn't look good for Feinstein and her AWB.

Her AWB failed the first time and now at least everyone knows it. The senate hearing at least confirmed that any outright gun grab is going to be a lot tougher than previously thought.

Feinstein was talking about the bump fire stock which allows the shooter to "fire 400-800 rounds allowing for multiple rounds to be fired from one pull of the trigger" Well if thats the case that would make the gun a machine gun and be highly illegal nation wide.

Then she talked about how you can accessories the AR to make it more accurate and deadly.............. Really? The gun is as accurate as its going to be even with accessories. What makes it better are better components that can affect accuracy. Barrel, ammunition, free floating barrel, etc can increase accuracy not a pistol grip, red dot sight or anything else she was hinting at.

She really lost it when she talked about how the bullets travel really fast and are capable of causing tremendous trauma to little people.......... I'm sure she was referring to kids and Sandy Hook, although I could be wrong. On the same note I sure in the hell glad she isn't aware of larger calibers out there. I mean she is convinced that the .223 round is the deadliest round on the market. Even though its on of the weaker side of the rifle world. Things like the .300WM .338 Lapua .375Cheytac, .50BMG/DTC are bigger and have a whole hell of a lot more wallop than the .223 round. Others at least are aware of this and see Feinstein as someone with an outdated agenda who is unaware of what she is pushing for.

She has even lost support here in Kommiefornia so hopefully she won't reign supreme too much longer.

Can you please elaborate on the very last bit regarding her having lost support here in ca? In 2012 she set the record for most votes for us senate in history with 7.75 million votes, and has been a politician since 1970. I sure as hell wasn't one of them, and I'd love it if she did lose support. I just don't think that's true. Looks like her death is way more likely than losing re election in this politically ****ed up state.

[someR1]

and yet we still have to worry about Yee. keep fighting the fight !

[zoid52]

Sweinstein has one hell of a lot a power in the senate . She is fixated in becoming 'the Senator' who saved America from the evil guns. She makes me puke!!!!!!

[Librarian]

Intending only to be slightly a scold, what is on her web site is NOT the bill. Even on Feb 1, the GPO has not completed its production of the actual bill as submitted.

And I will continue to point out that it really does not matter what details are in the bill, until it may go to the President for his signature. At that point we might have to figure out how to live with it.

It's a bad bill. Not enough could be removed from it to make it acceptable.

[Librarian]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:S.150:

Actual text now up. - but, see post above

[The Tiger]

Wow, serial numbers for magazines

[Dantedamean]

Originally Posted by The Tiger

Wow, serial numbers for magazines

I haven't read it yet but Whaaaaat? How dumb. She can't honestly think this will pass.

[RMP91]

It looks like she's going all out because she knows this will be her last chance...

Let's end this, once and for all!

[Drey]

Originally Posted by RMP91

It looks like she's going all out because she knows this will be her last chance...

Let's end this, once and for all!

Sounds like.

[Sakiri]

Originally Posted by OverUnderClays

We need to do everything, find holes in the legislation, getting the word out, and keep up the fight to keep our firearms!

Telling them the holes in it lets them fix it before putting it up again, and giving it a better chance to pass.

[Sakiri]

Wow. You sure DiFi ain't a guy? She's got some serious balls....

[russt]

Threaded barrels now on the banned rifle list, but flash hiders are now ok?

[Waffleobill]

Originally Posted by Sakiri

Wow. You sure DiFi ain't a guy? She's got some serious balls....

Don't underestimate her based on her octogenarian appearance and SF Libtard pedigree, she's a tough b*tch. I recently saw this story which reminded me of the reason for her CCW permit on Breitbart.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...y-permit-story