Skip to comments.Senate to introduce gun control bill without assault weapons ban
Posted on 02/04/2013 2:49:17 PM PST by neverdem
If a ban can't pass the Senate, it certainly won't pass in the House. Consider the assault weapons ban a dead issue, while the ammunition limit is alive and well.
Wall Street Journal:
Senate Democratic leaders expect a gun bill to move to the Senate floor that includes most of the proposals backed by President Barack Obama, with the notable exception of a ban on military-style, semiautomatic weapons, a top aide to Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said.
The bill would likely seek to limit the capacity of ammunition magazines; expand background checks to include sales at gun shows and other private transactions; and require better record keeping to keep guns out of the hands of those with mental illnesses. It would also try to curb gun sales in states with more relaxed gun laws to buyers in states with stricter laws.
But the strategy outline also reflects a growing sense within Democratic ranks that some of the president's most ambitious goals-particularly the call for new bans on certain types of military-style guns often described as assault weapons-may be unrealistic, the Reid aide said.
The goal is to get the bill to the Senate floor next month, at which point lawmakers could then seek to amend the legislation by adding a ban on certain semiautomatic weapons or other provisions, the aide said.
The details provide the first snapshot of how Senate Democrats plan to move forward on major gun legislation in coming weeks...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Who didn’t think/know this BS was coming. Throw a pile of crap against the wall and see what sticks.
It would also try to curb gun sales in states with more relaxed gun laws to buyers in states with stricter laws.”
Don’t they have to be shipped to a licensed dealer in your state?Doesn’t that dealer have to follow the laws of your state?
capacity bans on “potential life savers” is absurd.
the tech has loooooooong passed their puny little minds.
This is about registration.
That's specifically targeting INDIVIDUALS who exercise their Constitutional Right to Bear Arms, and are the SAME targets of Tax Laws that want to keep them at the mercy of Beaureaucrats who fear for self-defense-armed citizenry.
Run background checks and drug tests for EBT's and Obamaphones, and see who's left standing......
They will pass something just to pass something. It will not do anything to reduce crime or to address the causes of Sandy Hook or the Colorado shooting. These snakes realize that they overstepped their bounds, so an outright ban is not going to happen. Magazine limitations and expanded background checks are the most likely measures to pass. I think we can still stop the magazine restrictions, but I think something involving increased background checks will probably pass.
Then we'll come back for more next year.
None of this crap even makes sense!
Who didn't see that coming.
This is what passes for negotiating in the Senate.
They will pass something that is feeble at best. Then they will regulate it to death.
No, that’s a loophole. It was enacted in 1967 just so that interstate sales could take place altogether. HOW DARE THEY??? Don’t they know that Congress has the right to jugul-ate interstate commerce?????/s
Back in ‘09 I bought a whole bunch of Glock Factory 33 Round magazines. I bought them over the course of a few months at prices ranging from $25 to $33 each.
On CTD today, where I got about half of them, these same magazines are $189.95.......after this news, I expect them to go up over $200 or higher. If they don’t go for Universal Checks and just go for mag size limits our RINOs in Congress might just appease on that and then it’s the first big cut on the confiscation tree.
Not just no. Hell no! F’n Hell NO!
This is what leftists do, they nibble away at your freedoms
a little bit at a time. Don’t fall for it.
The important part...
The right of the people to keep and bear arms
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
Not limited by amount of powder/ball or by number or
in any other way. Period!
Anything else is unconstitutional and an attempt to
subvert the very basis of our government.
I purchased a rifle from a WA dealer and had to shipped to my FFL in ID to do the paperwork.”
And if that rifle was not legal in Idaho your FFL could not have given it to you. Right?
I was talking to my father yesterday (watches CNN all day long), and he said (head down), “I think we need to limit the magazines to 10.” I asked, “Well, Dad, what if you are accosted by three somebitches that need to be put down? Do you feel comfortable with 10 rounds? ‘Cause I sure as Hell don’t. I have 15, and carry a second mag.” The nature of the threat has changed. I used to carry a .357 6-shot revolver, but now I don’t fear having to kill a car, I’m faced with a damned flash mob of dozens of Amish. Semi-auto, no choice. And these bastards want to take it away from me? Give me a tiny magazine?
Mom and Dad declared they watch Fox some, but couldn’t tune the TV to get it. I just told them I give up until they get off the CNN crack.
First problem...we have Republicans that would sell out their country for a Washington DC cocktail party invitation.
Go after them NOW!
They really can’t stop it. Under the Gun Owners Protection Act passed back in the 1980’s I could go to PA and buy a rifle, throw it in my trunk and drive back to the northeast legally, even through states where that rifle may be banned.
What they want is a database of their enemies. They don’t give a crap what kind of weapons we have. That’s all posturing.
I don’t have a problem with 10 round clips. They almost never jam like larger capacity clips can.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.