[WaM14gunner]

'The Senate bills intend to prohibit the “sale, transfer, manufacture and importation of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines” and raise the age to buy assault weapons from 18 to 21, according to a statement by Feinstein.'

Maybe someone can explain to my simple mind the above statement.

 

[TheShooter]

Should be dead in the house. But the grandfather clause may make the RINOS vote for it. Not good.

 

[KurtC]

Maybe someone can explain to my simple mind the above statement.

It's illegal to transfer an "assault weapon," and it's double secret illegal to transfer it to someone under 21.

Feinstein was born in 1933, if that helps explain things.

 

[WaM14gunner]

It's illegal to transfer an "assault weapon," and it's double secret illegal to transfer it to someone under 21.

Feinstein was born in 1933, if that helps explain things.

Yeah, its pretty silly to ban something, then raise the age limit to purchase the thing you just banned the sale or transfer of. Unbelievable!

 

[boltaction]

Hello,
I'm glad, I don't own anything like that...

 

[MuppetMeat4Me]

Hello,
I'm glad, I don't own anything like that...

You and millions of others...

Lordie, What the... Hmmmm...

 

[TACTICOMP]

Hello,
I'm glad, I don't own anything like that...

"First, they came after their wealth, because I am not wealthy"
"And then they came for their rifle, because I don't have anything like that"
And then they came after me, but it's too late!

 

[Jackofalltrades03]

She introduces the same bill every year.....

 

[RAMMAC]

You can't seem to get anybody motivated to make major changes without a catastrophe, that reality works really well and progressives think that if they create enough catastrophes then they will eventually take over...except they might just get a catastrophe that they won't be able to handle.

 

[ChicagoMike]

'The Senate bills intend to prohibit the “sale, transfer, manufacture and importation of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines” and raise the age to buy assault weapons from 18 to 21, according to a statement by Feinstein.'

Maybe someone can explain to my simple mind the above statement.

They have to define what they mean by 'assault weapons'.
If they use the language consistent with the 94 ban... it would fail under Bruen. ( Should fail)

The other thing is that anyone who is 18-21 can sue and win because of the 2A.

It should be DOA and not leave the Senate.
But who knows.

The NYP ran a story on the gun used by the shooter in LA.
It was a MAC 10 clone in 9mm. Not a MAC 10. Semi-auto.

 

[SGM (ret.)]

This is the constant effort by the Dems and prog-libbies to disarm the citizens of the country, and this is what we should all be paying attention to all the time.

Folks who see some new anti-2A / gun-control law passed in the particular state are forever pondering why that has happened all of a sudden, or what all the sudden rush for gun-control is, etc., etc., etc.

Pay attention, folks, there is absolutely nothing sudden or mysterious about the Dem's plans, agenda, objectives or goals when it comes to gun-control and eliminating the 2A. They are public and constantly in-your-face about it.

Take them at their word. They will never stop. Like all fascist-terrorist, they only have to get it right once while the rest of us must fight them to a halt every time. The legal clock is never turned back, so every gain they make is a PERMANENT infringement on our 2A right.

 

[nicholst55]

She introduces the same bill every year.....

True that. The mindset is 'see, I'm actually doing something about gun violence!' They figure that if she lives to be 130 or so, maybe it'll be slipped in when no one is paying attention and be passed!

 

[Jim Horton]

It's grandstanding.

 

[DetroitMan]

'The Senate bills intend to prohibit the “sale, transfer, manufacture and importation of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines” and raise the age to buy assault weapons from 18 to 21, according to a statement by Feinstein.'

Maybe someone can explain to my simple mind the above statement.

It was written by idiots who understand guns even less than they understand most issues. That's the best explanation I can give.

If I were to suspend disbelief and assume a small amount of intelligence on their part, they are playing a game. They aren't confiscating the weapons, they are just preventing anyone who doesn't own one currently from ever owning one. They get to go on camera and say "We're not taking your guns" because they aren't confiscating them (yet). Raising the legal age is a pander to their base, who have gotten it into their heads that this will magically reduce crime. Also, they know this is extremely unlikely to pass the House, so they are playing politics. Republicans get to vote it down, and then the gun grabbers get to go on camera and brey about how Republicans oppose "common sense gun control."

Wow, I'm cynical this morning. Maybe I need more coffee...

 

[wifetrained]

Just how does this enhance public safety? What the shooter did was already against the law.

 

[boomerpusher]

You know it is NOT about public safety, it is about control.

 

[RichFool]

It's illegal to transfer an "assault weapon," and it's double secret illegal to transfer it to someone under 21.

Feinstein was born in 1933, if that helps explain things.

It really doesn't explain much because there are plenty of people that old who still have their mental faculties. Fienstein isn't one of them!

Even the Democrats want her to retire.

 

[KurtC]

It really doesn't explain much because there are plenty of people that old who still have their mental faculties. Fienstein isn't one of them!

Even the Democrats want her to retire.

Lots of folks in their 90's still have their faculties, but they shouldn't be making decisions that affect the lives of 350 million people (I'm counting illegals).

Congress needs to have term limits, along with annual cognitive testing. A written test on the Constitution wouldn't hurt.

 

[RichFool]

They have to define what they mean by 'assault weapons'.
If they use the language consistent with the 94 ban... it would fail under Bruen. ( Should fail)

It is the same as the '94 ban, but this bill doesn't allow for any "military characteristics." I remember getting an Eagle M15 which had a pistol grip, but no flash suppressor. Under this, even this one would be prohibited.

 

[boomerpusher]

"A written test on the Constitution..." ? We now have college grads who can't answer simple questions on the Constitution and you want those who make our laws to be able to pass a test? Get real.