Assault Rifle ban part II

[kraigwy]

Senator Dianne Feinstein is at it again, says she'll reintroduce assault weapon legislation.

http://www.scpr.org/news/2012/09/05/...uce-gun-legis/

Bad timing on her part, don't think it will float but you never know. It's time for all us to call are Senators and Congressman and tell them they wont get our support if they support Feinstein on her bill.

Vote, and vote pro-gun. We can't give up because you can bet anti gunners wont.

[KyJim]

Is anyone surprised? "Reasonable" gun regulation is in the platform of the Democratic party and it specifically mentions a ban on "assault rifles" as well as closing "the gun show loophole." Feinstein is smart, though. She knows such a ban would be darned near impossible to pass. I wonder if she owns an interest in any manufacturers making AR-15s? She managed to acquire $46 to $108 million dollars somehow. It wasn't all through her marriage. http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscong...Congress_2.htm. Just sayin' . . .

[BarryLee]

Is anyone surprised? "Reasonable" gun regulation is in the platform of the Democratic party

It is pretty easy to contrast the difference when you read the section in each party’s platform that deals with the Second Amendment.

[Tom Servo]

Guys, she has done this every single year since the sunset. It never even gets heard favorably in committee. It's not going anywhere.

Tell your friends and neighbors that so they don't get in a tizzy when they hear about it.

[twhidd]

More fuel for the NRA-ILA to scare people into donating more money. As someone already stated, this will go nowhere.

[Last Escape Pod]

Weapons of war do not belong on our streets, in our classrooms, in our schools or in our movie theatres

Just another politician making broad, general assumptions. Who is she to tell us what is right for ourselves? If I need or want the same gun troops on the battlefield use, that's a personal choice that I make with my own reasoning.

[Webleymkv]

Feinstein is simply pandering to her base. As Tom Servo pointed out, this has been done continuously since 2004 by the "usual suspects" including Feinstein, Schumer, McCarthy, and Rush. Given that it never makes it out of comittee and that Senate Majority Leader Reid, who is a member of Feinstein's own party, has a very favorable rating from the NRA (A or A+ last I knew) and is among the most gun-friendly Democrats, I'm not going to get all worked up about this just yet.

[Spats McGee]

I can't honestly say that I'm surprised. I haven't gone back and tracked her bills, but I have frequently read that she does this every year. I'll keep an eye on it. I've already written to my various congresspeople about 2A issues, so I probably will not write a special email to them on this . . . yet. It's kind of a "trust but verify" situation for me.

[ScottRiqui]

Like Webleymkv and others have said, it's just her way of being able to tell her anti-gun constituents that she's "trying to do something", while not really having to put herself at risk or expend any political capital in the effort.

Now, if we ever get someone who's willing to pull in favors, get in other people's debt, and risk re-election in order to make gun control a central tenet, then that would be much more worrysome.

[Technosavant]

Now, if we ever get someone who's willing to pull in favors, get in other people's debt, and risk re-election in order to make gun control a central tenet, then that would be much more worrysome.

Agreed.

Feinstein will introduce the bill (as she always does), but it won't go anywhere. The real threat would be if there were a significant shift to anti-gun politicians in the Congress and the President and party higher ups decide to make a strong push for a bill like this. As Congress currently stands, any ban is going nowhere. There's no gains to be made by pushing this agenda in most parts of the US, the politicians know it, and nobody wants to take a close reelection race and turn it into a sure loser by pushing an unpopular agenda.

As long as we remain awake and alert and keep electing pro-gun politicians who support the RKBA this will remain the case.

[thallub]

Feinstein is making noise: Her bill is going nowhere.

BTW: The bill dies on 31 December, 2012.

[jmortimer]

"Senate Majority Leader Reid, who is a member of Feinstein's own party, has a very favorable rating from the NRA (A or A+ last I knew) and is among the most gun-friendly Democrats..."
Let's be real, with Reid shoving liberal anti-gun Justices like Kagan and Sotomayor through, it is no wonder that Reid has a "F-" rating from the GOA. NRA sellout ratings bear no relationship to reality.

[maestro pistolero]

DNC announces closing the gun show "loophole" and renewing AWB is part of their platform.

May this be a nail in the coffin of anti-gun democrats re-election campaigns.

http://www.guns.com/dnc-platform-firearms-10893.html

[Webleymkv]

Let's be real, with Reid shoving liberal anti-gun Justices like Kagan and Sotomayor through, it is no wonder that Reid has a "F-" rating from the GOA. NRA sellout ratings bear no relationship to reality.

Let's also be real and understand that, on issues besides gun control, Sen. Reid is fairly liberal and thus it is unsurprising that he would vote to confirm Justices with other liberal views.

When talking about Supreme Court Justices, there are more issues on the table than just gun control. When Sen. Reid has had the opportunity to vote on gun control and gun control alone, his record isn't all that bad (I must amend my previous post as Sen. Reid currently has a B rating from the NRA). Sen. Reid's history on the matter isn't all that difficult to find for example:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/...un_Control.htm

Now, I do not want the above to be taken as a wholesale endorsement of Sen. Reid, that's partisan politics which is both off topic and against the rules of this forum. However, his record on gun control is directly pertinent to the discussion since he has a large hand in determining whether or not Sen. Feinstein's bill goes anywhere (and I'm almost positive that he'd like it not to).

Finally, I really don't want to get into a NRA vs. GOA debate here because it's off topic and counterproductive. I will, however, say that refusing to vote for any candidate who isn't completely "pure" in that he/she has never, ever supported anything that could possibly be construed as anti-gun won't leave one with very many, if any, candidates with better than a snowball's chance in Hades of getting elected.

[jmortimer]

My vote goes to the candidate who is best on Constitutional issues like the Second Amendment. There are plenty of good candidates to vote for and no reason to defend Reid on any level. A "B-" from the NRA with "grade inflation" tells me a whole lot.

[Webleymkv]

My vote goes to the candidate who is best on Constitutional issues like the Second Amendment. There are plenty of good candidates to vote for and no reason to defend Reid on any level. A "B-" from the NRA with "grade inflation" tells me a whole lot.

Regardless of what you think of Sen. Reid, the NRA, or anything else, the fact remains that Reid has one of the better 2A records in the Democratic Party. Whether you think they're "sellouts," "grade inflators," or anything else, the fact also remains that the NRA is the largest and most powerful special interest group on 2A issues and probably one of the largest and most powerful special interest groups in all of American politics. As such, it behooves Sen. Reid not to draw their ire if he wishes to continue being re-elected. Supporting renewal of the AWB is a surefire way to draw the ire of the NRA and would severely hurt Sen. Reid's re-election chances since his constituents are, by and large, pro-gun.

Likewise, renewal of the AWB would not be good for the Democratic Party as a whole right now and Sen. Reid knows this. Gun control is and has been a losing issue for the Democratic Party for nearly 20 years as it played a large part in the Republican takeover of congress in 1994, the election of President Bush in 2000, and the re-election of President Bush in 2004. There is also good evidence that support of gun control played a part in the failure to win re-election of the previous Democrat Senate Majority Leader, Tom Daschle, in 2004. The "usual suspects" like Feinstein, Schumer, Rush, and McCarthy all come from very liberal districts that are supportive of gun control, so pushing for the renewal of the AWB is politically expedient for them. The majority of the Democratic Party, however, come from moderate or conservative districts where gun control is not popularly supported. By allowing Sen. Feinstein's bill to die in committee, Sen. Reid allows her to pander to her own base without endangering himself or the Democratic Party at large politically.

[jmortimer]

"...the fact remains that Reid has one of the better 2A records in the Democratic Party."
I don't disagree but if the NRA gives Reid a "B-" what does that say about his fellow party members. Right, not much. As for the NRA, they lost me with the betrayal on the Disclose Act and NRA Board Member Cleta Mitchell, who a fantastic person, called the NRA out. 6-17-2010 Op-Ed from Ms. Mitchell from the Washington Post tells it like it is:
"For its part, the NRA -- on whose board of directors I serve -- rather than holding steadfastly to its historic principles of defending the Constitution and continuing its noble fight against government regulation of political speech instead opted for a political deal borne of self-interest in exchange for "neutrality" from the legislation's requirements. In doing so, the NRA has, sadly, affirmed the notion held by congressional Democrats (and some Republicans), liberal activists, the media establishment and, at least for now, a minority on the Supreme Court that First Amendment protections are subject to negotiation. The Second Amendment surely cannot be far behind."

I'll stick with the Constitution and not with a "group."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...061604221.html

[Webleymkv]

"...the fact remains that Reid has one of the better 2A records in the Democratic Party."
I don't disagree but if the NRA gives Reid a "B-" what does that say about his fellow party members. Right, not much. As for the NRA, they lost me with the betrayal on the Disclose Act and NRA Board Member Cleta Mitchell, who a fantastic person, called the NRA out. 6-17-2010 Op-Ed from Ms. Mitchell from the Washington Post tells it like it is:
"For its part, the NRA -- on whose board of directors I serve -- rather than holding steadfastly to its historic principles of defending the Constitution and continuing its noble fight against government regulation of political speech instead opted for a political deal borne of self-interest in exchange for "neutrality" from the legislation's requirements. In doing so, the NRA has, sadly, affirmed the notion held by congressional Democrats (and some Republicans), liberal activists, the media establishment and, at least for now, a minority on the Supreme Court that First Amendment protections are subject to negotiation. The Second Amendment surely cannot be far behind."

You're missing my point, I'm not trying to say that Sen. Reid or his party (or any other politician or party) is a shining champion of 2A rights, or any other constitutional rights for that matter. All I'm saying is that given his record on the issue and lack of political success that the Democratic party has suffered because of support for gun control, I think that Sen. Reid has been and will continue to be very, very wary of supporting Sen. Feinstein's gun control bills because doing so would be politically damaging to both him and his party.

Now, as I said before I don't want to get into bashing/defending the NRA, GOA, or any other group because it's off topic to this particular thread. The only reason that I brought up Sen. Reid's NRA rating to begin with (which by the way is a B, the B- was a typo) was to illustrate the fact that he's got more to lose by supporting an AWB than he does to gain.

If you want to discuss the merits and/or drawbacks of the NRA, GOA, Disclose Act, or anything else, I'd be more than happy to do so, but we should do it by going to PM in order to prevent one of the Mods from having to lock the thread for going off topic and/or getting into partisan politics.

[Tom Servo]

Weapons of war do not belong on our streets

What, like my Sharps and Spencer rifles? Or my Krag Jorgensen, which was lamented for its ability to rapid fire? Jeepers!

I can't believe the Democrats were naive enough to put renewing that in their platform. Double jeepers!

This thread is the merits and chances of another AWB. It's not a place to weigh in on whether the NRA or the GOA or the Muddy Creek Rifle Club is more hard-core in their beliefs.

[Al Norris]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

This thread is the merits and chances of another AWB. It's not a place to weigh in on whether the NRA or the GOA or the Muddy Creek Rifle Club is more hard-core in their beliefs.

Gee, that didn't take all that long... Are you listening, jmortimer?

[jmortimer]

"Are you listening, jmortimer?"
Yes sir. There is no chance of the AWB making it to House or even out of Senate.

[Tom Servo]

In case you don't feel like reading through the whole platform, here's the policy section on firearms:

We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements – like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole – so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few. [p. 18]

Closing the gun-show loophole? Reasonable restrictions? Where have I heard those phrases before? Oh yeah, the Brady Campaign's post-Heller scrambling. Looks like they've still got some pull with somebody.

In any case, it's still a simmering crockpot of epic fail and grasping at straws. You won't find the votes on either side of the aisle to support this, and even potential supporters are old enough to remember 1996.

[rebs]

What are these people thinking ? They need to spend more time on dealing with the unemployment rate and balancing the budget. It seems they have a one track mind, screw the citizens as much as they can. Cut Medicare and SS screwing the elderly and retired people.
How many people in the firearms business will loose their jobs with more gun control, they need to find ways to create jobs not eliminate them. People like her are mainly educated people that do not have a clue because they are too busy serving themselves and making more and more money for themselves. Do many of them really give a crap about the country and its citizens ?

[Eghad]

Some politicians just introduce this stuff to show their political base they are still aligned with them. Even when the Dem Party had the majority and The White House from 2009-2010 they didn't do anything. That's because even though a state put a Dem in Congress he was a very conservative pro 2A Dem. So even with a majority in both Houses of Congress the Dems could not manage any anti-gun legislation.

[Odd]

Theoretically, if the AWB were resurrected, could individual states choose to override it? (Something along the lines of Arizona's immigration law and medical marijuana in some of the states.)