close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

We knew it was coming. Only a matter of time. Feinstein to intro new AWB.

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by opto_isolator, Dec 16, 2012.

  1. opto_isolator

    opto_isolator Extinct GOP

    145
    0
    Aug 2, 2006
    Orlando
    Just saw this on the Huffington post rag. Her bill plans to outlaw new rifles and limit magazine size....
     
  2. Yup, saw Durbin on Fox saying the same thing. We shall see if Boehner and the House have any guts left.
     


  3. steveksux

    steveksux Massive Member

    19,636
    1,945
    Jul 12, 2007
    Who's the Dem who introduces an AWB bill every session? Wasn't that Feinstein? Or someone else?


    ETA: http://www.lowellsun.com/news/ci_22199247/assault-weapons-ban-legislative-history-bills

    Feinstein has introduced something similar a number of times, also McCarthy. Biden did also. Interestingly enough, turns out a Republican introduced one in 2008.

    None have gone anywhere. None followed on the heels of such a heartwrenching tragedy though. Hopefully cooler heads prevail.

    Randy
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2012
  4. Yes they do. I do expect however that our local politicians may cave next time around on a magazine ban if/when one is introduced next year.

    It's worth noting that the usual suspects always reference the Brady Campaign. Well according to the brady bunch CT is ranked 5th behind NY, NJ, MA and CA as having the best gun control laws.

    For those interested you can see many of CT's firearm statutes and office of legal research reports at this link.
     
  5. I hate to say it:

    I think there is no doubt this tragedy will cause a seachange in how the average person sees guns and the need to "control" them. People who have ardently supported 2nd Amendment rights up to now are very likely going to be a little less ardent, a little less vocal. My expectation is that there WILL be new guns laws inacted...how far-reaching is the issue. Even the Supremes have said that, while the 2nd A's "militia" means "the people", some controls would be permissible in the context of the 2nd's intention. Boehner and the Republicans will likely not be able to withstand the pressure because they will look around and see too many of their own constituents writing and marching against guns. They will lose support around the edges of the party such that they will lose the overall majority and there will be enough votes for more control.

    A few out-of-control crazies have caused support for one of this country's cherished individual rights to erode. And, sadly, I think that trend will continue because we seem to be breeding more irresponsible idiots every year, a % of whom eventually do something incomprehensible with a gun and turn more of the populace away from us. This is not our fathers' America any more. JMHOs, of course.
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2012
  6. republicans have been caving on everthing lately. but these kind of laws have never stopped criminal activity
     
  7. steveksux

    steveksux Massive Member

    19,636
    1,945
    Jul 12, 2007
    I think you are wrong. The right to carry has been expanding, not contracting. There have been far too many mass shootings, schools, theaters, since FL started the conceal carry revolution way back when. The AWB was allowed to sunset, and was not reinstated. SCOTUS has finally come out and said RTKBA is an individual right, after decades of sidestepping the issue, or ruling it is NOT an individual right.

    So your one premise is demonstrably false, the right has been expanding, not eroding.

    You may be right insofar as this incident may have the potential to turn that progress around, I would not argue against that. I hope you are wrong. I think its too early to tell.

    Randy
     
  8. pugman

    pugman

    6,148
    314
    May 16, 2003
    Wisconsin
    Ban guns of all types tomorrow and when something like this happens again they will just move to the next "cause" like video games which I really think would be the next target.
     
  9. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    34,969
    9
    Feb 22, 2005
    Republic of Texas
    Unfortunately, when they are busy going after the video games, we would all be at the mercy of armed criminals who didn't give theirs up.

    Kinda late then. Write your representatives today.
     
  10. pugman

    pugman

    6,148
    314
    May 16, 2003
    Wisconsin
    Already gave up mine...see I was fishin' one day and...
     
  11. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    34,969
    9
    Feb 22, 2005
    Republic of Texas
    Sorry about your loss. :whistling:
     
  12. Ruble Noon

    Ruble Noon "Cracker"

    11,018
    2
    Feb 18, 2009
    :goodpost:
     
  13. I fervently hope you're right Randy. But again, I doubt it. I do think a seachange in the majority's attitude about gun rights may be coming. This one really hit people in the gut....all those kids. It's emotional and I suspect it's going make a strong imprint on many for quite some time...an imprint that leads them to support more controls.
    The antis will use those kids' images shamelessly for months, maybe years. And some parents will allow them to do it because they want "something" done and may not be in the mindset to think it through. Those images are powerful.
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2012
  14. barbedwiresmile

    barbedwiresmile Unreconstructed

    10,033
    42
    Feb 3, 2008
    Dixie
    I hope she bans the shoulder thing that goes up. For the children's sake.
     
  15. steveksux

    steveksux Massive Member

    19,636
    1,945
    Jul 12, 2007
    I agree, this is different from the others, has way more emotional impact.

    I think as time passes that will dull somewhat though, and seeing as how CT already has an AWB, and in addition this guy had mental issues (wondering if they were of the sort that would preclude him from getting a gun under current law? Something to verify), that will deflate the argument that more gun control might have prevented this. We don't have to speculate, they had it, it did not.

    The one thing that was not tried which they could argue might have made a difference is a total ban on gun ownership. I see no way in hell THAT has any chance of passing the GOP controlled house. Very little chance that would have pass even in the Democratically controlled Senate either. Too big of a change, they don't have the cojones to try that. Even if by some miracle they did, SCOTUS has already shot that idea down in DC, ownership cannot be banned, and the Chicago case in Fed court has done the same in Chicago to absolute carry bans, and will be set in stone nationwide if it goes to SCOTUS. Constitutional amendment would be required to change that.

    Feinstein will propose an AWB bill, it will get lip service and may even get voted on instead of ignored like all her other AWB bills. Doubt even that would pass the Senate, although wouldn't bet against it after this tragedy. House, no way.

    Not sure if Obama would sign it. Being from Chicago and Hawaii, he's comfortable with restrictive gun laws, so he may be inclined to. He would not want to poison the election for the next set of Democrats to run though, he's pragmatic. For instance, he did sign a bill allowing carry in National Parks (Forests?), although as a rider to another bill. Shows he's not dead set against it, a single issue vetoer if you will.

    So I think its far from a foregone conclusion that an AWB will be passed as a result of this. Having said that, it's far from certain there won't be one as well. It's too early to tell, it will depend on who's the more skillful at manipulating public opinion in the coming months. They have the advantage at this point with the media to transmit their narrative, and a horrible tragedy to base the narrative on.

    Randy
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2012
  16. nmstew

    nmstew

    1,456
    0
    Jan 6, 2007
    I predict it will go the other way actually.

    When I was in High school in the 90s people said I was in a militia because I went shooting with a shooting group.

    Now those same people have ARs and handguns of their own and even ask me for advice on them. I went to a gun show in May after Obama got elected the first time. The place was packed butts to nuts and I don't even think the convention center had a floor because I never got to see it. I think seeing things like this happen the casual pro-gun American buys all they can. What we need to do is convince them to in addition to buying ARs and magazines, send money to the NRA-ILA to try to avert the madness in the first place, and write their elected officials to be counted.
     
  17. PBR Sailor

    PBR Sailor

    449
    0
    Dec 4, 2004
    CONUS
    This is nothing new. Fienstein started this crap on November 7th right after she knew that Obama had won the Presidential race.
     
  18. Ruble Noon

    Ruble Noon "Cracker"

    11,018
    2
    Feb 18, 2009
    Why would the government want to ban weapons? You'd think that with all their fear and all the bills that they are passing to combat "terrorism' that they'd want the populace to have the latest and greatest weaponry. Has the "terror" threat ended and can we look forward to the repeal of all the spying laws that they passed in the name of combating "terrorism"?
     
  19. PBR Sailor

    PBR Sailor

    449
    0
    Dec 4, 2004
    CONUS
    Control over U.S. citizens is a higher priority than fighting terrorism at this time. Hopefully priorities will shift after the next election in 4 years.