Jump to content

Assault Weapon Ban of 2019

Recommended Posts

Not that I think this will go anywhere, but this is their wet dream.




            Washington—Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) today led a group of senators in introducing the Assault Weapons Ban of 2019, an updated bill to ban the sale, transfer, manufacture and importation of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines.

            In addition to Feinstein, Murphy and Blumenthal, cosponsors of the bill include Senators Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.).

            “Last year we saw tens of thousands of students nationwide take to the streets to demand action to stop mass shootings and stem the epidemic of gun violence that plagues our communities. Our youngest generation has grown up with active-shooter drills, hiding under their desks—and now they’re saying enough is enough,” said Senator Dianne Feinstein. “Americans across the nation are asking Congress to reinstate the federal ban on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. If we’re going to put a stop to mass shootings and protect our children, we need to get these weapons of war off our streets.”

            “Military-style assault rifles are the weapons of choice for mass murderers. There’s just no reason why these guns, which were designed to kill as many people as quickly as possible, are sold to the public,” said Senator Chris Murphy. “This past year, we’ve seen Americans rise up and demand Congress change our gun laws. Banning assault weapons would save lives, and I’m proud to join Senator Feinstein in introducing this bill.”

            “Assault weapons and high-capacity magazines are deadly and dangerous weapons of war that belong on battlefields—not our streets. They have no purpose for self-defense or hunting, and no business being in our schools, churches and malls,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal. “By passing this legislation, Congress can honor the memory of the beautiful lives cut short by military-style assault weapons in Newtown, Parkland, Las Vegas, San Bernardino and far too many other American cities. This is the year for my colleagues to turn our rhetoric into reality and finally end America’s gun violence epidemic.”

Key provisions:

  • Bans the sale, manufacture, transfer and importation of 205 military-style assault weapons by name. Owners may 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 may 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 may keep existing magazines.

Exemptions to bill:

  • The bill exempts by name more than 2,200 guns for hunting, household defense or recreational purposes.
  • 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.

Updates to Assault Weapons Ban of 2017:

  • Bans stocks that are “otherwise foldable or adjustable in a manner that operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability of a firearm.”
  • Bans assault pistols that weigh 50 or more ounces when unloaded, a policy included in the original 1994 ban.
  • Bans assault pistol stabilizing braces that transform assault pistols into assault rifles by allowing the shooter to shoulder the weapon and fire more accurately.
  • Bans Thordsen-type grips and stocks that are designed to evade a ban on assault weapons.

Mass shootings that took place last year using military-style assault rifles:

  • Las Vegas, Nev. (October 2018): In the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history, a gunman opened fire on concertgoers in Las Vegas, killing 58 people and injuring 422 others. The gunman used multiple AR-15 style assault rifles fitted with bump-fire stocks.
  • Sutherland Springs, Texas (October 2018): A gunman entered a church killing 26 parishioners and injuring 20 others. His weapon was an AR-15 style assault rifle.
  • Parkland, Fla. (February 2018): A student at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School opened fire on his classmates and teachers, killing 17 and injuring 17 more.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Malsua said:

Not that I think this will go anywhere, but this is their wet dream.

This is what I said the Dems will do. They will throw crappy Bill after Bill out there, this one could pass in the House. They will just bury Trump and the Senate, in piles of B.S. legislation, investigations and false claims, hoping something will stick.

There will be NO helpful legislation coming out of Congress the next two years.


  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

Blatantly Unconstitutional post-Heller for many reasons. 

You realize that that doesn't matter, correct?  They will pass it (if they can) and let the courts sort it out if the courts become so inclined.  

Whether or not the law is lawful is not their concern.  Their concern is re-election.  Nothing more.  

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sniper said:

this one could pass in the House. 

There will be NO helpful legislation coming out of Congress the next two years.


It COULD pass in the house, but not a definite. 

Agreed on the second sentence. 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tremble, tyrants and you traitors The shame of all parties, Tremble! Your parricidal schemes Will finally receive their prize! 

Everyone is a soldier to combat you, If they fall, our young heroes, Will be produced anew from the ground, Ready to fight against you! To arms, citizens ...


Aux armes, citoyens, Formez vos bataillons, Marchons, marchons! Qu'un sang impur Abreuve nos sillons!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as the Republicans are in charge, Mitch McConnell will ensure that this never makes the Senate floor.  But when the Democrats re-take control, make no mistake that this will become law.  Fortunately, there's a good chance that by then, we will have a solidly conservative SCOTUS to overturn it.  

BTW, the Las Vegas shooting was in October, 2017, not 2018 as it says in the bill.  They couldn't even take the time to get that right.  

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Screwball said:

Bans bump-fire stocks and other devices that allow semi-automatic weapons to fire at fully automatic rates.

Well, wouldn’t that set you up to ban lightened triggers... and then ban semi-autos, as you can shoot them at full-auto rates?

That guy Jerry  Miculek can shoot a revolver at automatic speeds. 8 shots in something like 1.2 seconds, or similar. 

He did 6 shots and a reload then another 6 in under 3 seconds.

They gonna ban fingers? Ban practicing good technique? 

I know, he's special, but it still makes the point I think. The gun-ban-nuts will never get wise to the fact that guns CAN be a good thing.

Instead of wasting allll that money fighting against guns, it would be far more effective using it for hardening the "soft targets" with training and equipment and planning that would "SAVE THE CHILDREN" .

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bt Doctur said:

When the dust settles the "Liberator"  or the "GB-22" will again rise from the ashes to defend America


Is that the single shot .45 dropped over Europe? The question is, where will they come from?

Edit: that was the FP-45 apparently. Found the .22 version...

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Old Glock guy said:

In case anyone has any doubt as to the intent of these bills, see this article in The Federalist:


They can ban anything they want - they have to enforce it - that's when there will be enough blood in the streets - let's see what will happen - maybe that Tree of Liberty will finally be watered.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • NJGF members in chat (2)

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Posts

    • For the way it burst, it's not a real squib. It would have to be an underloaded cartridge that stopped basically right at the muzzle. This is unlikley but possible.  My guess is the following:  There's probably something wrong with the metal of the barrel. They got a bad batch of stainless with impurities or weird crystal structures or something. Much like SA did when they had the spate of stainless slides snapping off at the slide cut on their 1911s.  It is also not uncommon for the machining for a lever action with a tube magazine to negatively impact the boar as far as accuracy on a good sample, and this is often due to the machining changing the bore diameter or roundness.  Combine that with bum steel and the fact the angle on the dovetail is a stress riser, and one of two things happened.  1) It was a bad enough combination that it the bullets hammering into the bore constriction were able to basically split the end of the barrel open.  2) Lots of soft lead ammo was being shot, and the  bore restriction at the cut was effectively scraping off some lead and causing a build up until #1 happened.  #2 could in theory happen badly enough to kill a gun without bad steel being involved, but usually you stop shooting first and try to figure out why your gun is do horribly inaccurate.   
    • 12ga. Flash bangs .........don't know if they are Jersey Legal...used in Alaska quite a bit to move bears.
    • What article are you reading? At no point does he argue 300 million gun owners. He points out there are about 250 million adults in the us and the at least number for how many guns per capita are in circulation.  The biggest number he poses as actual resistance is the veteran population at about 20 million.  I'd argue that the scenario is very wrong as a whole, but more on that at the end.   The estimates are that the number of gun owners in the US are 100 million. The number that owns them is smaller than that.  The only ownership stat he gins up is that to get all the semi-autos, you would have to raid 9 million households. This is based on his estimate of number of semi-auto guns out there (which is probably conservative for the reason he states), and his math of netting 3 prohibited guns per raid. Which Is a number that may be high or low. I really can't say. LOTS of people tend to own way more than one semi auto rifle. On the other hand, how good would the data mining be to target things successfully? My guess is that the number of raids would have to be much higher because you would have WAY less than 100% accuracy on semi auto ownership.    This is where I think a whole bunch of people stop thinking rationally, and the author's nod to the IRA is apt, and it becomes important to keep in mind that the number of raids is seriously, seriously optimistic.  His math is a bit off. Doing some rounding to whole numbers, it's really 869 raids per team, and thus 869 raids per officer to hit that optimistic number. Assuming no attrition, casualties, etc.  There's ~100 million gun owners.  The question is how many of them do you get?  There's also another ~200 million non gun owners. the question is what will they put up with before they see the government as a problem?  Because the reality is you are likely going to have to kick down WAY more than 9 million doors to get them all. Even at 9 million, that's basically one in every 13 homes.  And that is if they ONLY ban semi auto rifles and things work out beyond optimistically. Realistically, even with high quality data mining, face to face sales, 80% receivers, etc will mean going to a number of households larger than that, AND so far the stupidity seems to want to include semi auto pistols. So... WAY. WAYYYYY more households than that.  But lets be kind and say double it.  That means kicking in the door of about 1 in 5 households. That will generate opinions amongst the populace.  And he already suggested how it would be organized. It'll be the guys you know and trust. You ahve a handful of buddies you have known forever? One of them jsut got capped by a SWAT team last weekend and you are getting together after the funeral for a drink and really pissed off? Maybe you get to talking about how some fuckers need to pay?  How many more people when they hear rumors of things that sound like they might be talking about you will give you a ring to let you know something might be happening but without putting any real skin in the game?  This is how it happens at the very least. More organized than that? Look at how many gangs we have in the US. They have their own governing documents and rules and such. They are arguably competing forms of government in some locations.  As a concept, the havock the IRA caused was with WAY less guns and with a peak of at best about 5000 active trouble makers. A lot more sympathetic ears and people willing to be low commitment on the fringe, but 5000 really problematic ones.    I do think he is optimistic about the retribution on the ruling class. I suspect it would look much more like enough cops get killed that the cops collect their pay checks while knowing the cops just don't go into that part of town for anything real.      I don't totally disagree with you. I have said before and I will say again that all politicians are scum. they don't care about anything but gathering power and influence and not wanting to work to retain it.  If a ban ever did come about, there would be NO intention of enforcing it thoroughly. Just like there has been zero attempt made to really enforce ANY gun control law to date thoroughly outside of already regulated entities.  Whenever something happens, nothing effective is suggested to prevent crime. What is suggested is  something that would make it harder to mint new gun owners and to stifle the existing social structures of gun owners.  Why? Because to the mind of a politician they see it as destroying a voting block that opposes them FOREVER. They will likely remain opposed, but opposed and unorganized and to diffuse into other voting blocks. They don't do anything about the crime because crime creates fear, and fear can be used to gather votes. Enforcement will be arbitrary and periodic so they can keep the former gon owning voting block afraid to stand up on the subject, and keep the anti-gun voting block intact and in fear of the evil criminal gun owners. Because if you actually solved the "problem" of gun owners, the anti-gunners could vote for whoever now. If you actually fixed the criminal problem, your voters who want law and order out of fear could go vote based on other priorities.  The only real point of conversations like this are to point out how people are being lied to, and how those who give a crap need to focus on the other strategies and put some effort into them.  IMO the real hazard for CW2.0 surrounding guns is that we DO get a half assed ban, and some politician thinks because they said it is so, it is truly so. And decides to do something else incredibly stupid that lets them find out how many guns they didn't actually confiscate. 
    • Remember, it only takes 3% to produce "change".. What could 3,000,000 "focused" individuals accomplish in the country? Averaged out, that would be 60,000 per state. Could 60,000 pissed off gun owners take over control of NJ? How about half that number?
    • Yes to be considered a farm and get the farmland accessment it must be 5 acres or more and you have to make over certian amount of money from the farm. But you dont need to own a farm to own livestock

Important Information