So I asked a question about if anyone had seen anywhere if Biden indicated how he plans to actually define an assault weapon?
The thing that prompted me to ask this question was this quote from his website
Instead most of the responses were people commenting on the legality of such a ban and the limits of executive orders. While this is a fair debate to have it is not directly related to what I asked and belongs in a thread of it's own. This resulted in the thread being locked before I could respond to the people that did respond to my question.
Here is a link to the original thread https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/question-about-bidens-assault-weapons-ban.879550/
I kindly ask that you please keep your responses limited to the scope of my original question to avoid this happening again. Thank you so much in advance.
Remember the only question I am asking is if anyone has seen anything that has indicated how Biden plans to define an "assault weapon"
"a detachable ammunition magazine and has one or more military characteristics including
a pistol grip
a forward grip
a barrel shroud
a threaded barrel
a folding or telescoping stock"
Okay so based on this definition it would be very similar to the current DC ban with the major difference being the threaded barrel itself rather than the specific type of muzzle device. However I don't see how this definition would "limit the weapons lethality" this is close to what I had originally assumed he would try to do but after reading that quote from his website was wondering if anything more. But I have not been able to find any information in his rhetoric or press releases.
yes I understand there is some speculation here but what I am asking is if he or now that he has started picking cabinet members they have said anything or published that may indicate how the Biden administration would actually define "assault weapon" as statements on his website seem to run contrary to the traditional understating of the language that is used in "assault weapon" bans
The thing that prompted me to ask this question was this quote from his website
For example, the ban on assault weapons will be designed to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor changes that don’t limit the weapon’s lethality
Instead most of the responses were people commenting on the legality of such a ban and the limits of executive orders. While this is a fair debate to have it is not directly related to what I asked and belongs in a thread of it's own. This resulted in the thread being locked before I could respond to the people that did respond to my question.
Here is a link to the original thread https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/question-about-bidens-assault-weapons-ban.879550/
I kindly ask that you please keep your responses limited to the scope of my original question to avoid this happening again. Thank you so much in advance.
Remember the only question I am asking is if anyone has seen anything that has indicated how Biden plans to define an "assault weapon"
SharpDog said:I believe they will try to close any loopholes this time. Good luck with your 'compliant configuration'.
I would start with the Feistein ban legislation. It will be at least that and likely more.
Senators Introduce Assault Weapons Ban - Press Releases - United States Senator for California (senate.gov)
"a detachable ammunition magazine and has one or more military characteristics including
a pistol grip
a forward grip
a barrel shroud
a threaded barrel
a folding or telescoping stock"
Okay so based on this definition it would be very similar to the current DC ban with the major difference being the threaded barrel itself rather than the specific type of muzzle device. However I don't see how this definition would "limit the weapons lethality" this is close to what I had originally assumed he would try to do but after reading that quote from his website was wondering if anything more. But I have not been able to find any information in his rhetoric or press releases.
CapnMac said:This is an issue with a big bag of "ifs" in it.
POTUS can only sign legislation brought to him. That requires a compliant Congress, both House and Senate. And, then the houses both have to agree.
At present all we have in campaign rhetoric, which has been, historically, mercurial.
So, there are no answers here, no better than speculating on a meteorite impact. Purely speculative at best.
yes I understand there is some speculation here but what I am asking is if he or now that he has started picking cabinet members they have said anything or published that may indicate how the Biden administration would actually define "assault weapon" as statements on his website seem to run contrary to the traditional understating of the language that is used in "assault weapon" bans