House passes semi-automatic gun ban after 18-year lapse

caribou said:

...one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” – Martin Luther King, Jr.

Click to expand...

IIRC, he wrote that in A Letter From a Birmingham Jail. If you continue reading down further, he also wrote that, if one is going to break an unjust law to bring attention to the injustice, one must be willing to accept the punishment for breaking the law, hence the title of his essay-A Letter From a Birmingham Jail. Which of us wants to be first to go to prison?

Maineshooter1 said:

Can't they use the nuclear option to override the filibuster?

Click to expand...

I doubt they have the votes for that. Manchin and Sinema are the road block there. If they couldn't do away with the filibuster to pass a voting rights bill, I don't see it happening for an assault weapon ban. Of course, that is assuming unified Republican resistance. Don't count on that, either.

Alte Schule said:

They need 10 Rep. Senators to support the bill to break the filibuster. I don't believe that will happen. I wouldn't doubt that a few Dems will vote no.

Click to expand...

It's totally possible. They got it for the previous bill.

hso said:

It doesn't involve private possession. The result, if passed by the Senate, would be like the earlier AWB. Private possession and sale wouldn't be impacted.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1808/text#HCD804EBB4CA5437B85F6816236B87CF0
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1808/text#HE61096DA589644AA89CFA1B9FBE39932

Click to expand...

“(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession, sale, or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of enactment of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2022.

There it is, thanks.

Fitzpatrick PA and Jacob's NY voted for the ban. PA's getting more like NJ everyday. Wonder who was the R that didn't vote.

hso said:

As to how close the House vote was,

Click to expand...

The calculus among the House members was that the bill would die in the Senate. Therefore, the vote for or against it was a political "freebie." Posturing for the November elections.

Understood, but I have absolutely no confidence in the Rs or the expected R surge in November. Hope I'm wrong.

CDW4ME said:

“(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession, sale, or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of enactment of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2022.

There it is, thanks.

Click to expand...

You also need to read SEC. 5. BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR TRANSFERS OF GRANDFATHERED SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1808/text#HBAA50012B1214D90AC97259840D47CCD

“(t) (1) Beginning on the date that is 90 days after the date of enactment of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2022, it shall be unlawful for any person who is not licensed under this chapter to transfer a grandfathered semiautomatic assault weapon to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken custody of the grandfathered semiautomatic assault weapon for the purpose of complying with subsection (s). Upon taking custody of the grandfathered semiautomatic assault weapon, the licensee shall comply with all requirements of this chapter as if the licensee were transferring the grandfathered semiautomatic assault weapon from the licensee’s inventory to the unlicensed transferee

Click to expand...

If passed, you will no longer be able to do a private sale without having a FFL handle the transfer.

hso said:

It doesn't involve private possession. The result, if passed by the Senate, would be like the earlier AWB. Private possession and sale wouldn't be impacted.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1808/text#HCD804EBB4CA5437B85F6816236B87CF0
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1808/text#HE61096DA589644AA89CFA1B9FBE39932

Click to expand...

Believe me - it is a very small step from banning them to removing the grandfathering clause if 1808 becomes law.

When the violent crime involving guns does not magically go down after this, they will "have to take the next step" (like they have so many times before) to "save us" It matters little to them they are stupidly chasing after the wrong solution (instead of enforcing penalties against breaking the law).

Wasn't it in Heller that SCOTUS said they cannot ban guns in common use? Semi autos & ARs are pretty common.

hso said:

That is not a small step. It is off the cliff into a clear constitutional violation and there are far fewer politicians willing to kick that hornet's nest.

Click to expand...

I agree with the first part. But from what I've seen in the last few years. There are more people willing to go against the constitution than ever before.
Focusing on gun rights is like focusing on one cloud in the sky.

Maineshooter1 said:

Why are people saying it’s “automatically dead” in the Senate?

Click to expand...

Because even the people that ignore 53 dead illegals in a tractor trailer but go on non stop about 21 dead in Uvalde, know it’s just for show.

House passes assault weapons ban that’s doomed in the Senate

Click to expand...

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/29/house-passes-assault-weapons-ban-thats-doomed-in-the-senate.html

The level of GOP opposition indicates the bill is unlikely to advance in the evenly split Senate, where it would require the support of at least 10 Republicans to defeat a guaranteed filibuster. It’s also not clear if the measure has the support of all 50 Senate Democrats.

Click to expand...

I bet even John Cornyn won’t support this one…

12Bravo20 said:

Don't get your hopes up that this dies in the Senate with all of the turncoat RINO's. I don't trust my own Senator.

Click to expand...

I trust both of mine to vote for anything the Democrats dream up. The one I don't vote for is a liberal snake.The one I vote against is an ultra liberal that I I won't insult snakes by comparing him to. The state is dominated by Democrats and except for local and county officials conservatives might as well just stay home on election day.

hso said:

That is not a small step. It is off the cliff into a clear constitutional violation and there are far fewer politicians willing to kick that hornet's nest.

Click to expand...

I wish I had your optimism.

The introduction of this bill late yesterday, after having been shelved, then seeing it pass has brought back memories of 1994. I watched the voting on the so called "Crime Bill" on C-Span. I saw that initially, the vote didn't pass. Voting continued. Members got up and started moving around. Some left, others started talking to each other. Voting continued. Finally, when there were enough votes to pass, voting stopped. I sat in disbelief at the way the vote had been conducted in clear contradiction of procedures.

I am sure the shenanigans and cahoots that politicians play today make whatever happened almost twenty years ago seem like nothing. We have an exceedingly corrupt class of politicians willing to compromise our rights away. And, for whatever it's worth, not just a few of the politicians who were making deals twenty years ago are still making deals today. Only they are bolder and in leadership positions.

hso said:

That is not a small step. It is off the cliff into a clear constitutional violation and there are far fewer politicians willing to kick that hornet's nest.

Click to expand...

I was going to say that eliminating the grandfather provision would be huge. Constitutional objections aside, there is just no way to eliminate tens of millions of existing guns. Especially when there would be a culture of non-compliance. This is why they put in a grandfather provision in the first place.

This bill is political malpractice on the part of the Democrats. There is no upside for them (they're not going to gain any additional votes), and there is plenty of downside. They seem to have forgotten their electoral disaster of 1994, after they passed the original AWB. (This just goes to show that both sides are living in their own self-reinforcing bubbles. The Republicans are not immune from this, either.)

It is only a non starter till the composition of the USC changes!

hso said:

It isn't optimism. It is based on being a 2A activist since the AWB. Taking guns from citizens is a constitutional non starter at the Fed level.

Click to expand...

First - let me say I do agree to that it would be unconstitutional to demand the guns be turned over from lawful owners. However, off hand I can think of several ways they might try

What I would envision first would be the sale and/or inheritance would be prohibited - no transfers or sales. When you no longer wanted (or needed) the weapons it could be accomplished with a procedural change to state that for safety, "all transfers of weapons on the attached list are prohibited" and the guns go for destruction. I am certain there would be lawsuits, but they would take years...and there would be no guarantee a temporary injunction would prevail.

After that? What more laws would you need... the weapons slowly leave circulation and only the felons would own them.

John_R said:

Midterm candidates will campaign to repeal it.

Click to expand...

It wouldn't do any good.

Assuming that this bill passes the Senate and ends up on Biden's desk he will sign it no questions asked.

Assuming a red wave in the midterms they could put a bill to repeal it on Biden's desk and he's never going to sign it.

And let us not forget that Bush was on record as saying that had the House and Senate presented him with a permanent assault weapons ban in 2004 he would have signed it into law.

By and large, "R" & "D" is just branding.

They want you disarmed