Bill to Ban Assault Weapons, High-Capacity Magazines Hours After House Dems Pass Gun Control Bill

[mnrivrat]

Before we all panic, we should remember that the filibuster in the Senate is still there. It still takes 60 votes to even move a bill out of committee. Reconciliation only applies to a very narrow range of economic measures. Now, there are a number of democratic senators that are against removing the filibuster rule, with Manchin chief among them. Sinema and Tester probably aren't too hot on the idea either. They know and remember how removing the filibuster for judges backfired on them. ( Thanks Harry! )

If and when the filibuster rule is removed...THEN it will be panic time.

I hear what you say , however I know their is a word called "RINO" , and that does allow for some degree of panic to occur .

 

[natman]

A new category(?) "Sniper Bolt Action"
No doubt then next thing on a coming ban list

It's absolutely the next thing on the list. This has been the gun banners MO for decades. If they tried to ban all guns at once it wouldn't pass, so they ban guns one slice at a time. Make up a scary name, demonize the guns the scary name fits and then claim the scary guns are the only ones they want to ban.

Next year, change the scary name, rinse and repeat.

 

[Paul7]

Not passed, yet. Just introduced by Dianne Feinstein and, at last count, cosponsored by 34 Democrat Senators. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...roduces-ban-on-205-different-assault-weapons/

So could we assume 16 Dem senators would oppose this?

 

[Paul7]

It's absolutely the next thing on the list. This has been the gun banners MO for decades. If they tried to ban all guns at once it wouldn't pass, so they ban guns one slice at a time. Make up a scary name, demonize the guns the scary name fits and then claim the scary guns are the only ones they want to ban.

Next year, change the scary name, rinse and repeat.

"It's for the children......"

If this passes I can almost guarantee you the GOP takes Congress next year. Ask Bill Clinton what gun control did to his party.

 

[armoredman]

Only if HR1 doesn't pass. If it does, then nothing the Democrats do will matter at all - the elections will be 100% rigged in Democrat favor.

 

[P89DCSS]

"It's for the children......"

If this passes I can almost guarantee you the GOP takes Congress next year. Ask Bill Clinton what gun control did to his party.

Except one of the bills the Democrats want the slam through is election reform. If they pull it off after destroying the filibuster, conservatives will never win another election in all Blue and Purple states. Unlimited illegal immigration will turn Red states Purple and its game over for us.

 

[tark]

A C-96 holds ten. The full auto models hold 20 in a detachable magazine.

 

[tark]

Only if HR1 doesn't pass. If it does, then nothing the Democrats do will matter at all - the elections will be 100% rigged in Democrat favor.

Again, guys, HR-1 isn't going anywhere. The constitution expressly mandates that each state can make its own election laws. HR-1 is an attempt to force states to adopt a federal set of rules for national elections. It may get passed and sent to Biden to sign, but it would be expedited to SCOTUS where it would be thrown out in a New York second. A Constitutional Amendment is the only way it could become law.

 

[Poper]

So could we assume 16 Dem senators would oppose this?

My advice is do not count on it. The final count has yet to happen.

 

[Poper]

It may get passed and sent to Biden to sign, but it would be expedited to SCOTUS where it would be thrown out in a New York second. A Constitutional Amendment is the only way it could become law.

Under normal circumstances in the past, I would agree with you. However, recent events to not assure me of this scenario.
Judging by the events of the past 6 months or so, if it gets to Biden's desk and is signed into law, SCOTUS is likely to do just about anything. I can see no guarantees going forward.

 

[Ignition Override]

Wall Street Journal today had a short editorial about Guns. Left side of the last two or four pages.

Whether or not the writer's mention of "8 million new shooters", "females", "minorities", is a solid factor in his conclusion - or not (...I don't know...) - he stated that Schumer Will Not find the support for a 60 vote requirement.

Refresh my memory on why 60 vs. 51 votes would be needed for any Senate vote of any type.....?

* Many of us suspect that any bill with a good chance to hit the Senate Floor will be very watered down compared to any of their boastful plans right now.
As long as the next potential Young Billy Thin Skin on certain anti-depressants doesn't become "Riders on the Storm" when he feels socially isolated in school,

 

[old lady new shooter]

So could we assume 16 Dem senators would oppose this?

We don't need any Dem senators to vote in favor (although if some did that would be nice), there are only 50 of them, in the Senate 60 votes are required for passage. I do remember Manchin saying in an interview awhile back that nobody's taking his AR, so one. We do need to avoid R defections though.

 

[Ignition Override]

old lady new shooter:
True. I wish that we were mistaken about them.
Senators Collins and Murkowski sometimes truly "flabbergast me" and I wonder why many of their decisions are so painfully drawn out and tortured.

 

[Robert]

We have wandered around the topic, off the topic, back to the topic, and strayed too deep in the political weeds. Let's call it a day for now. If and when more information becomes available, or there is a change in the bill we can come back to this.