Feinstein Goes For Broke With New Gun-Ban Bill (NRA-ILA Letter)

NRAILA.org ^ | December 27, 2012 | NRA-ILA

[servo1969]

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)—author of the federal “assault weapon” and “large” ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004—has announced that on the first day of the new Congress—January 3rd— she will introduce a bill to which her 1994 ban will pale by comparison. On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, “I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012.

According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein’s website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of “assault weapon” that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners. Some of the changes in Feinstein’s new bill are as follows:

• Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms.  The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.
   
• Adopts new lists of prohibited external features. For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the “pistol grip” of which “protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon,” the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any “grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” Also, the new bill adds “forward grip” to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as “a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.” Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban.
   
•  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 carries 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 1944 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 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. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.”
  
  

The Department of Justice study. On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders. To the contrary, this is what the study said: “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders. Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995. . . . However, with only one year of post-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban.  Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously.”

“Assault weapon” numbers and murder trends. From the imposition of Feinstein's “assault weapon” ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of “assault weapons” has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an “assault weapon” is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE’s firearm manufacturer reports, availablehere. From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s—all models of which Feinstein’s new bill defines as “assault weapons”—rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation's murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type.
 

Traces: Feinstein makes several claims, premised on firearm traces, hoping to convince people that her 1994 ban reduced the (relatively infrequent) use of “assault weapons” in crime. However, traces do not indicate how often any type of gun is used in crime. As the Congressional Research Service and the BATFE have explained, not all firearms that are traced have been used in crime, and not all firearms used in crime are traced. Whether a trace occurs depends on whether a law enforcement agency requests that a trace be conducted. Given that existing “assault weapons” were exempted from the 1994 ban and new “assault weapons” continued to be made while the ban was in effect, any reduction in the percentage of traces accounted for by “assault weapons” during the ban, would be attributable to law enforcement agencies losing interest in tracing the firearms, or law enforcement agencies increasing their requests for traces on other types of firearms, as urged by the BATFE for more than a decade. 
 

Call Your U.S. Senators and Representative: As noted, Feinstein intends to introduce her bill on January 3rd. President Obama has said that gun control will be a “central issue” of his final term in office, and he has vowed to move quickly on it. 

Contact your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 gun and magazine ban. Our elected representatives in Congress must here from you if we are going to defeat this gun ban proposal. You can write your Representatives and Senators by using our Write Your Representatives tool here: http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/grassroots/write-your-reps.aspx 
 

Millions of Americans own so-called “assault weapons” and tens of millions own “large” magazines, for self-defense, target shooting, and hunting. For more information about thehistory of the “assault weapon” issue, please visit www.GunBanFacts.com.

[Perseverando]

[DTogo]

[Redleg Duke]

Working on it for a year, while hoping and praying for the madman to rise.

[Pearls Before Swine]

I predict it passes the Senate, but never sees the light of day in the House. I don’t think the GOP will filibuster it with Obama on TV saying that the gun crazies are holding the nation hostage over this and stopping the business of fixing the fiscal cliff.

[IslamE]

They have destroyed homes via divorce, they are trying to replace God with government, they have destroyed the family unit by encouraging single births, they have encouraged child sacrifice on a massive scale, now, they are coming for the guns! The elites are conspiring against the last bastion of free humans on the earth, The United States of America!

[Cringing Negativism Network]

I dunno.

The Senate is freaking out to lunch now, and the Dems are trying to ram this through.

I say the House will indeed stand firm. Might just save the speaker’s job.

Stand firm House of Representatives.

[basil]

These people are like ghouls-— waiting around for another mental case to go completely bezerk so that they can dance on the graves of their victims to pass their agenda.

The mentally ill will always be among us. Occasionally, one of them will figure a way to do their evil deeds.

No one will ever rid this country of guns, and even if that were possible, there are other ways to cause multiple deaths.

The bottom line is that the sane, law abiding people have to have the tools to defend themselves against the evil doers.

Isn’t it funny, that’s it’s the people with armed body guards who are always the ones screaming for the disarming of the rest of us.

[apillar]

I predict it passes the Senate...

I don't even see it getting that far, there are seven democrat senators up for reelection in 2014 from rural "red" states who DO NOT want to have to be put in a position where they have to vote on this, the only Republican still in the senate that supported the renewal of the 2004 Ban is Collins. I highly suspect that Harry Reid doesn't want to lose his title of Majority Leader over gun control considering that the democrats are going to have enough time holding the senate as it is. Besides even if he tried he would have a difficult if not impossible task of getting 50 votes, let alone the 60 needed to stop a filibuster. My guess is he will let it wither away in committee, then quietly die once the passions die down on the issue.

[servantboy777]

Dianne Frankenstein knows full well this has no chance of passing. My take on it...this is a precursor to an executive order/action.

Obozo will come out and spout that he is compelled to act as congress is deadlocked on the gun issue.

Who knows what the executive action could be, but these people need to begin breaking down gun ownership to advance their agenda. Not totally clear what the agenda is, but it doesn't look like freedom.

Using legislation, executive action, U.N. treaty, the courts, Uncle Sugar will throw as much stuff against the wall to what sticks and they will keep on...keepin on until they sufficiently erode our right to defend ourselves from an ever growing oppressive entity.

[MissMagnolia]

We didn’t think Obamacare would pass either. Republican Senator(s) voting the bill out of committee so it could be discussed or whatever and the d@mn thing was passed. ANY part of this gun bill could be passed by the cowards in Congress. They need to hear a resounding NO to all parts of it ..... they should hear the ‘thunder’ in the distance from the ‘NO’s’ .... loud and often. The NRA is putting on 8K members a day - if 8K constituents called per day, maybe these dirtbags who are supposed to be representing us would listen. I wouldn’t “predict” anything or “think” the GOP will or won’t do something - we need to make SURE they don’t screw us over again. Just think ... the scum gave the Federal government control over our BODIES and our lives ... and we allowed it. If we allow them to pass any part of this gun bill .... we might as well march like lemmings to the police department and just give it all up and then march ourselves to the government gulags.

[baddog 219]

[Jim Noble]

considering that the democrats are going to have enough time holding the senate as it is

You voted for the ban on GOP Senate candidates discussing rape, birth control, or female body parts?

[apillar]

I'm actually slightly encouraged by this, if Feinstein had pushed a relativly mild bill like a straight up renewal of the 1994 ban, it...might...have stood a chance. But she, as the title states, "went for broke" and threw in "poison pill" crap like a registration scheme (guess she didn't learn from Canada...) and in doing so lost any chance that rural red state senate democrats and moderate republicans would get on board, let alone the Republican House.

[Carriage Hill]

This isn’t going go well or end well, for any of us. Here in PA, state reps are set to introduce ‘gun control’ bills, as are other states:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/27/states-cities-already-mulling-assault-weapons-bans/

[crosshairs]

Bastards.

[MrB]

In short, the left is building Satan’s kingdom.

Indeed, we are in the last days. All of the technologies necessary to build his kingdom and fulfill prophecies is present.

But, I’ve read the back of the book, and we win.

[rarestia]

They are looking to push through a bill that touches the taxation mechanism of the NFA, and I believe, as such, that the bill must start in the House. That didn’t stop them from pushing Obamacare through, but just wanted to make sure it was understood that any bill affecting the treasury, as this would do since we would be required to register and pay for a tax stamp, must start in the House.

Again, I doubt the House will call for it being out of order, but they should.

[kellyrae]

I agree, a new gun law isn’t the path they will take. I jotted this down in my journal the other day:

Paraphrased from the EPA website:

On April 2, 2007, the Supreme Court found that Greenhouse Gases (GHGs), including carbon dioxide, fit within the definition of air pollutant in the Clean Air Act (CAA). Now, less than 4 years later, GHG emissions will, for the first time, be covered by federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Operating Permit Programs. These permitting programs, required under the 1977 and 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, are proven tools for protecting air quality and the same tools will be used to reduce GHG emissions. But the thresholds established in the CAA for determining which businesses are subject to these permitting programs were based on traditional pollutants and were not designed to be applied to GHGs. EPA’s GHG Tailoring Rule, issued in May 2010, established a common sense approach to permitting GHG emissions under existing permitting programs. The Tailoring Rule sets different emission threshold criteria for permitting based on carbon dioxide equivalent emissions. Under the rule, permitting will focus on the largest industrial sources, while shielding millions of small businesses that make up the vast majority of the U.S. economy

Future text from the ATF website:

On April 2, 2014, the Supreme Court found that Assault Weapons (AWs), including semiautomatic weapons, fit within the definition of regulated items in the National Firearms Act (NFA). Now, less than 2 years later, Assault Weapons will, for the first time, be covered by federal Firearm Registration and Transfer Tax Programs. These registration programs, required under the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA) and the 1968 Gun Control Act (GCA), are proven tools for protecting public safety and the same tools will be used to reduce AW violence. But the characteristics established in the NFA/GCA for determining which weapons are subject to these programs were based on traditional military firearms and were not designed to be applied to all firearms. ATF’s Firearm Safety Tailoring Rule, issued in May 2015, established a common sense approach to permitting AWs under existing registration programs. The Tailoring Rule sets different criteria for registration based on current military characteristics of modern firearms. Under the rule, registration will focus on the most dangerous weapons, while shielding millions of hunters and sportsmen who make up the vast majority of Americans gun owners.

My prediction:

The liberals are waiting to have a packed supreme court, then they will challenge the definition of “NFA-firearm.” Semiautomatic firearms are much more closely related to NFA-regulated-firearms than greenhouse gases are related to CAA-regulated-pollutants. If the EPA can completely disregard the clear language of the CAA, the ATF can completely disregard the clear language of the NFA/GCA. No new laws will need to be passed. No new agencies or government programs will need to be created. And Congress, the direct representatives of the people, will once again, be totally irrelevant.

[servantboy777]

U.N. small arms ban (treaty).
EPA - lead ammunition environmental hazard (regulation).
HHS - gun violence national health threat, lead ammunition health threat (regulation).
AG - Gun violence national security threat (regulation).
Congress - legislation re instituting a weapons ban.
Courts - federal injunctions halting sales of “assault weapons” until courts make decisions.
Liberal State/municipal governments enacting new gun laws, ordinances restricting gun ownership.

I can see it coming.