Why in the world is she doing this? The other day I read an article wondering the same thing, saying the legislation was so outlandish it would be dead on arrival in the Senate.
I think she is throwing the whole pile of crap against the wall in order to get as much of it to stick as possible. This is dangerous to all lawful gun owners, which by the way, will not be very many if she gets her wish. Here is part of it. Mindless bullhockey is what I think of it all. We’ve got to stop paying attention to these people just because they are elected by foolish voters in a faraway state. Imagine trying to hunt with a semi-auto across state lines. I want to hunt in Alabama, I use a semi auto hunting rifle, I have to get the BATF to approve me by providing me with “papers”?
And if I die my kids can’t keep my lawfully owned firearms because I’m dead? Who thinks that is constitutional? ( A slick attempt to destroy gun ownership in ONE generation!)
Screw that.
The woman is nuttier than the Hatter in Alice. Jeez.. Nancy is the Queen of Hearts and now Diane is the Hatter. What are we?
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 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 1941 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 transfer 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. But most of the guns on the list either wouldn’t be banned in the first place, or would already be exempted by other provisions. On the other hand, the list inevitably misses every model of rifle and shotgun that wasn’t being manufactured or imported in the years covered by the reference books Sen. Feinstein’s staff consulted. That means an unknown number of absolutely conventional semi-auto rifles and shotguns, many of them out of production for decades, would be banned under the draft bill.
Several years ago we had McCain/Feingold try to stop our ability to criticize them during their reelection campaign. It was finally overturned by the Supreme Court, because we got lucky. Then we have Obamacare demanding we pay the State for our right to healthcare (an outright violation of our free will). Now we have “Cardinal” Diane Feinstein demanding we turn in our guns. Why? Because the next time they want to limit our freedoms we won’t be able to resist.
Welcome to Diane’s dream of a new world order. I never wanted to believe it possible- outside a book of what I thought was political fiction I wrote years ago. Now I’m worried things are going to get sporty unless her more level headed colleagues can get through to her. How in the world does she think turning eighty million law abiding decent citizens into felons- many law enforcement officers and military, both active and retired- is going to work out for her and her supporters?
Madness. Just elitist, isolated in a bubble, Louis the XIV madness. I warn my friends that just because we are in America does not remove us from the threat of tyranny. Humans will always seek to control and abuse other humans, it is our nature and why our Founding Fathers tried so hard to give us the tools to keep it from happening. The same tools people like Feinstein feel should be destroyed.
…Our obsession with the Constitution has saddled us with a dysfunctional political system, kept us from debating the merits of divisive issues and inflamed our public discourse. Instead of arguing about what is to be done, we argue about what James Madison might have wanted done 225 years ago.
As someone who has taught constitutional law for almost 40 years, I am ashamed it took me so long to see how bizarre all this is. Imagine that after careful study a government official — say, the president or one of the party leaders in Congress — reaches a considered judgment that a particular course of action is best for the country. Suddenly, someone bursts into the room with new information: a group of white propertied men who have been dead for two centuries, knew nothing of our present situation, acted illegally under existing law and thought it was fine to own slaves might have disagreed with this course of action. Is it even remotely rational that the official should change his or her mind because of this divination?…
You know what none of these people get? The reason for the second Amendment was to guarantee the safety of the others. Put another way, when Diane, bug-eyed and spitting, screams “Let them eat cake!” the answer may just come from a well armed gentleman with a slow Southern drawl saying “No ma’am. I don’t think that is how this is going to go. You work for us, we don’t serve you. A shame you have forgotten that.”
Which is what makes Diane lay awake at night. As it should be.