The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 25, 2013, 10:28 PM   #1
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,488
Full text of Feinstein's bill

The full text of Feinstein's AWB bill has been posted to her Senate website.

Note that the section on background checks for transfers of grandfathered assault weapons starts on page #119 of the PDF file, where is could easily be overlooked after the 93-page listing of exempt firearms.

The actual bill is not as vile as Feinstein has been claiming for the last month. Possession and transfers of weapons are allowed. I need to cross-reference the other laws that the background checks section cites, but it does not (after a very quick first read) appear to be NFA registration and taxation.

----------

I have posted an abbreviated version of the bill to Scribd that is only 6 pages long after omitting the lists of weapons and government exceptions.

.

Last edited by gc70; January 28, 2013 at 04:36 PM. Reason: added link to more readable version of bill
gc70 is offline  
Old January 25, 2013, 10:30 PM   #2
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: TEXAS!
Posts: 1,383
Thanks!
A couple of news agencies are noting that the votes, particularly Dem votes in the Senate are not there. Too bad for DF.
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابي
TXAZ is offline  
Old January 25, 2013, 11:09 PM   #3
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,321
If you're on a slow connection and don't want to download the pdf, Scribd has it online here.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old January 26, 2013, 02:25 AM   #4
Dr Big Bird PhD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 778
Im going to be honest here.

If someone has to write and spell out 90 pages of exemptions, many of which have 10-20 separate names for the same firearm, then I have no words to describe how little I respect you.

(holy crap look at the Remington 700 list, did she just copy and paste from the website?),
__________________
I told the new me,
"Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'"
But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back."
Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor
Dr Big Bird PhD is offline  
Old January 26, 2013, 11:30 AM   #5
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,488
Yes, she did just copy and paste names to make the list. It is all about public perception. "Look - we ban 157 guns, but gun owners still have over 2,200 to choose from!" She wants to give the uninformed public the impression that the ban only affects a few "bad" guns on the fringe.
gc70 is offline  
Old January 26, 2013, 11:59 AM   #6
scrubcedar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2012
Location: Southwestern Colorado
Posts: 478
I ran across the section titled " Seizure and forfeiture of large capacity ammunition feeding devices" but it ran into references of what looked like how they would enforce it by modifying existing laws. Can anyone translate that section into plain English?
__________________
Gaily bedight, A gallant knight In sunshine and in shadow, Had journeyed long, Singing a song, In search of El Dorado
scrubcedar is offline  
Old January 26, 2013, 12:12 PM   #7
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,073
Thanks, gc70. I've been waiting for the actual text to arrive.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old January 26, 2013, 12:54 PM   #8
hardworker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 4, 2010
Posts: 820
Quote:
Yes, she did just copy and paste names to make the list. It is all about public perception. "Look - we ban 157 guns, but gun owners still have over 2,200 to choose from!" She wants to give the uninformed public the impression that the ban only affects a few "bad" guns on the fringe.
No, she is removing ambiguity from the law. If she doesn't clearly define what it is she is banning and not banning, the law is worthless. It's actually a well written law that boils down to:

No more ARs, AKs or semi-auto machine pistols
No more high-cap mags
Background checks for private sale of Assault Weapons
hardworker is offline  
Old January 26, 2013, 03:02 PM   #9
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardworker
No, she is removing ambiguity from the law. If she doesn't clearly define what it is she is banning and not banning, the law is worthless.
The "good gun" appendix in the bill lists 325 semiautomatics (33 centerfire rifles, 48 rimfire rifles, and 244 shotguns), which does remove any question about those weapons.

How many people do not already know whether or not their guns are semiautomatics? For any who do not know, the bill clearly defines semiautomatics and also contains an explicit exclusion for any other firearm that ‘‘is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action." The 80 pages listing over 1,900 guns that are not semiautomatics and are, by definition, clearly excluded from the ban serves no valid purpose.

Touting a ban on 157 named semiautomatics while allowing 325 would sound a lot harsher than claiming a ban on 157 while allowing over 2,200.
gc70 is offline  
Old January 26, 2013, 04:29 PM   #10
Dr Big Bird PhD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 778
Okay, so what if Daniel Defense or S&W came up with a completely different semi-auto rifle not listed in either good or bad? Much like the HK XM8 or something.

Does this law basically just ban certain models that can be altered and refurbished with new furniture and aesthetics to be legal? Or would this ban anything thats not listed specifically?
__________________
I told the new me,
"Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'"
But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back."
Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor
Dr Big Bird PhD is offline  
Old January 26, 2013, 06:11 PM   #11
wally626
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2009
Posts: 635
There are provisions to ban like weapons as well. Besides which it would be hard to make just cosmetic changes and not be an assault rifle.
wally626 is offline  
Old January 26, 2013, 06:33 PM   #12
doofus47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2010
Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent
Posts: 1,298
What about my vz58?

Ok, I'm almost apoplectic for a number of reasons, but the one that mostly gets my goat is the list of exceptions for retired law enforcement personnel. Nothing against them and their previous career, but nothing says "creating a cool club" like the gov't making exceptions for the people in the gov't. If you need a large capacity ammunition feeding device to be in SWAT, fine. But why do should you have the "right" to own a 30 round magazine once you become joe golf-a-lot in Orlando?

Nothing says the opposite of "of the people for, by the people and for the people' louder than "we have stuff you don't, b/c we're in the gov't."

Isn't this why many developing nations have problems with corruption in government, b/c being IN the government allows access to money and power (weapons) that NOT being in the government does not and corruption follows those official positions b/c that's where opportunity lies?
__________________
I'm right about the metric system 3/4 of the time.
doofus47 is offline  
Old January 26, 2013, 10:18 PM   #13
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,321
Quote:
Okay, so what if Daniel Defense or S&W came up with a completely different semi-auto rifle not listed in either good or bad?
Doesn't matter. If it's not on the good list, it wouldn't be legal. That's the problem: the very concept of a roster of "approved" weapons means that the pool of available guns shrinks, prices rise, and there's no incentive to innovate.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old January 27, 2013, 11:27 AM   #14
CSHammond
Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2009
Location: Iowa
Posts: 54
This is just typical of what this shifty lying administration does.



To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to
keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.

Then they add something in after something passes and says that was the other purpose. Makes me sick.
CSHammond is offline  
Old January 27, 2013, 12:56 PM   #15
JWT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 16, 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 3,147
All the more reason to keep sending e-mails and letters to members of Congress expressing your views. They do matter.
JWT is offline  
Old January 27, 2013, 01:37 PM   #16
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,488
There is troubling language in Section 5 on Background Checks at the end of the bill.

(t)(1) requires all transfers of grandfathered weapons to go through FFLs. Transfers to family members are not excluded.

(t)(2) provides an exclusion for "a temporary transfer of possession for the purpose of participating in target shooting in a licensed target facility or established range" but does not define the terms for those locations.

(t)(3) partially defines the term 'transfer' as: "(A) shall include a sale, gift, or loan; and (B) does not include temporary custody of the grandfathered semiautomatic assault weapon for purposes of examination or evaluation by a prospective transferee."

The concept of requiring background checks for temporary transfers of possession is very disturbing, particularly when there is even a special exception for holding a gun you are considering buying.
gc70 is offline  
Old January 27, 2013, 02:41 PM   #17
Buzzard Bait
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 334
retired law enforcement?

Am I to understand that if I were ever a law enforcement officer I would be largely exempt from this bovine excrement? Does that mean I Could go take a course get hired by a sheriff's office work a few days and quit and be for ever a retired law enforcement and exempt or am I just wishing. Right now my temper does not let me rad this very closely.
bb
Buzzard Bait is offline  
Old January 27, 2013, 05:39 PM   #18
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,488
Buzzard Bait:

The retired LEO exemption is only for retirement gifts or weapons or magazines purchased post-ban by the individual for official use. Even then, "retired in good standing" may have the same meaning as in LEOSA - retired by disability or after 10 years or more.
gc70 is offline  
Old January 28, 2013, 01:30 AM   #19
Mello2u
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,424
It must be obvious that this proposed legislation is not about making children or people in general safer.

The Ruger Mini-14 is on the "Good" list and we all know it is practically the same as the AR-15.

The bill's definition of semiautomatic assault weapon is crazy.

Quote:
The term ‘semiautomatic assault weapon' means any of the following, regardless of country of manufacture or caliber of ammunition accepted:
(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any 1 of the following:
(i) A pistol grip.
(ii) A forward grip.
(iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
(iv) A grenade launcher or rocket launcher.
(v) A barrel shroud.
(vi) A threaded barrel.
(C) Any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.
(D) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any 1 of the following:
(i) A threaded barrel.
(ii) A second pistol grip.
(iii) A barrel shroud.
(iv) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
(v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.
(E) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(D)(v) [So long Glock 17s]

How does any one or combination of these cosmetics make a firearm a bad thing?

This bill should be named the semiautomatic firearms ban.
These people (the bill's sponsors and supporters) are borderline psychotic. They are projecting what they would do onto normal responsible people who would not do what they (the irresponsible politicians) would do.

A Semiautomatic Assault Weapon
is like
an unelected selfless politician; neither exists.
__________________
NRA Life Member - Orange Gunsite Member - NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society,
they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it.
" Frederic Bastiat
Mello2u is offline  
Old January 28, 2013, 12:00 PM   #20
honkytonkrolltide
Junior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2012
Posts: 4
My favorite Feinstein "moment of stupidity" was when she was interviewed back in, I think 93, when trying to pass her first AWB. She was asked what is a "barrel shroud"? Her response was what she described as some sort of devices that mounts to your shoulder and fires, similar to the Predator's shoulder mounted laser.... What an idiot! Goes to prove she knows nothing about this subject.
honkytonkrolltide is offline  
Old January 28, 2013, 12:20 PM   #21
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,427
I don't think that was Feinstein. I think that was Carolyn McCarthy.
JimDandy is offline  
Old January 28, 2013, 01:43 PM   #22
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,321
It was McCarthy.

We can spend all day bemoaning Feinstein's willful ignorance of firearms, or the sloppy research she did while drafting this law. It doesn't matter.

What matters is reaching out to politicians and seeing that it does not pass.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old January 28, 2013, 02:57 PM   #23
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,073
I haven't had the opportunity to read this 122-page monstrosity, but here's the part that worries me:
Quote:
to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited . . . .
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old January 28, 2013, 03:03 PM   #24
Fishing_Cabin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 715
Spats....

We know they want to limit the second ammendment, the huge question is, at what point are they satisfied with the limits they impose?

Keep in mind if this or similar legislation is passed, there will be future legislation to restrict even more.
Fishing_Cabin is offline  
Old January 28, 2013, 03:07 PM   #25
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,321
Quote:
We know they want to limit the second ammendment, the huge question is, at what point are they satisfied with the limits they impose?
I'm still waiting to see what gun owners are supposed to get out of all this. After all, didn't they want to have a conversation with us?
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.15339 seconds with 10 queries