Senate Dems Introduce Assault Weapons Ban

eodtim said:

I have pasted the announcement from Sen Cardin's page which also discusses Sen Van Hollen's support.

November 08, 2017
Cardin, Van Hollen Join Democratic Senators to Introduce Assault Weapons Ban

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senators Ben Cardin and Chris Van Hollen (both D-Md.) joined Senator Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) to introduce the Assault Weapons Ban of 2017. This legislation would ban the sale, transfer, manufacturing, and importation of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines.

“The safety of our children and communities should never be put at risk by partisan gridlock,” said Senator Cardin. “I am sympathetic to the interests of legitimate hunters and collectors, but the federal assault weapons ban never should have been allowed to expire. As lawmakers, we cannot stand idle after each deadly shooting, failing to take action. We know that we won’t be able to stop every tragedy, but we absolutely can save lives.”

“Congress must act to confront the rising death toll from gun violence – from the day-to-day crime in our neighborhoods, to mass-shootings like those we’ve seen in Las Vegas and Sutherland Springs. Inaction is complicity,” said Senator Van Hollen. “Assault weapons are becoming the weapon of choice for mass shooters and this common-sense bill will help get dangerous weapons off our streets and save lives. The American people need us to act now, and I urge my colleagues to take up this legislation immediately.”

Key Provisions:
•Bans the sale, manufacture, transfer and importation of 205 military-style assault weapons by name. Owners can keep existing weapons.
•Bans any assault weapon that accepts a detachable ammunition magazine and has one or more military characteristics, including a pistol grip, a forward grip, a barrel shroud, a threaded barrel or a folding or telescoping stock. Owners can keep existing weapons.
•Bans magazines and other ammunition feeding devices that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, which allow shooters to quickly fire many rounds without needing to reload. Owners can keep existing magazines.

Exemptions to the Bill:
•The bill exempts by name more than 2,200 guns for hunting, household defense or recreational purposes. This list will be updated to include additional weapons.
•The bill includes a grandfather clause that exempts all weapons lawfully possessed at the date of enactment.

Other Provisions:
•Requires a background check on any future sale, trade or gifting of an assault weapon covered by the bill.
•Requires that grandfathered assault weapons are stored using a secure gun storage or safety device like a trigger lock.
•Prohibits the transfer of high-capacity ammunition magazines.
•Bans bump-fire stocks and other devices that allow semi-automatic weapons to fire at fully automatic rates.

Joining Senators Cardin, Van Hollen, and Feinstein on the bill are Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Tom Carper (D-Conn.), Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Corey Booker (D-N.J.), Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.).

https://www.cardin.senate.gov/newsr...tic-senators-to-introduce-assault-weapons-ban

Click to expand...

Jim12 said:

Among the host of issues: Should Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution apply? What is the bill sponsors' argument that current owners be allowed to keep the listed guns, but those who don't already have them can't obtain them? This would amount to a generational phase-out of the named firearms (others to be added, just watch), not unlike former MD Att'y General Joseph Curran Jr.'s "A Farewell to Arms." Those alive and in lawful ownership of them would be the last generation to have them.

What happens to the listed, non-transferable guns when the current owner dies? Any provision for transfer at death? Doesn't look like it. Would they be "turned in" and melted down? This bill could render them valueless as an estate asset. That would be a taking without just compensation. And, if it were proposed that some arbitrary amount be paid, what is the "fair market value" of freedom? Priceless.

The sponsors of this Bill and their ilk would set the stage for the next tyrannical ruler who might give rise to the Founding Fathers' expressed need for these and other firearms. The Founding Fathers themselves experienced tyranny and defeated it, and forewarned and forearmed us against future tyrants with the Second Amendment. Even its deterrent effect has great value. In fact, there's little doubt that if those firearms were already gone now, that these same politicians who want to restrict Americans' rights would be emboldened to infringe on civil rights and property rights even more boldly and blatantly than they do now, unfettered by the fear of a civilian uprising.

The Second Amendment wasn't adopted in a vacuum. The Left wants us to forget the tyranny, conflict, and circumstances giving rise to it, and to the entire Bill of Rights. In fact, they want us to forget those who enacted the Bill of Rights, because it directly conflicts with their collectivist, Marxist ideology and everything it stands for.

Click to expand...