Assault weapons ban dropped from Senate bill

[frigidmagi]

Yahoo

Democrats on Tuesday confirmed that a proposed ban on assault weapons will not be included in a package of gun reform legislation yet to be introduced in the Senate, suggesting the measures do not have broad support in Congress.

The bill's sponsor, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, confirmed to reporters Tuesday that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will remove an assault weapons ban from a package of gun reform legislation, and offer it separately as an amendment.

"I very much regret it," Feinstein said of Reid's decision. "I tried my best."

Reid's decision signals how politically volatile the issue of an assault weapons ban remains and suggests gun reform measures would die in the Senate if it included such a ban—something many political observers had long suggested.
Following the Dec. 14 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., Feinstein introduced legislation to reinstate the assault weapons ban, which was first passed in 1994 under President Bill Clinton and expired in 2004.

But despite a burst of energy behind the reduction of gun violence in the wake of the shooting—energy that some believe has already begun to wane—the ban threatens to place Democrats who represent strong gun rights constituencies in a tough electoral position, and continues to be highly unpopular among Republicans.

The Senate Judiciary Committee on March 14 passed Feinstein's bill, which banned assault weapons as well as magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The committee has also passed a bill that would expand background checks for gun buyers and close the so-called gun show loophole that allows people to avoid a background check if they buy weapons from private sellers. That bill, which Democrats on the committee hoped could attract Republican support, passed without a single Republican vote, a bad sign for its chances in the Senate.

The assault weapons ban was hailed by Democrats including President Barack Obama, who has advocated for the measure. "These weapons of war, when combined with high-capacity magazines, have one purpose: to inflict maximum damage as quickly as possible. They are designed for the battlefield, and they have no place on our streets, in our schools, or threatening our law enforcement officers," Obama, in a statement, had said at the time.
Liz Goodwin contributed to this report.

Yay! Now they can try for something that might actually solve problems.

[B4UTRUST]

Yay! Now they can try for something that might actually solve problems.

Nope, because saying you're improving the country's mental health and wellness system just doesn't have the same headline attention grabbing effect that 'Congress Voting on Assault Weapons Ban' does. If it happens it won't be quick, decisive or really attention worthy outside of the fact that it did nothing to really do anything. I mean I hope I'm wrong, I really do. But my faith in our elected leaders to do something that needs to be done and not something that just grabs headlines is almost nil.

That said, I'm very happy about this. I happen to like my AR-15.

[Josh]

Now kill the mag ban and the backdoor registration scheme and I'll be content. I'm cool with the whole fed felony for trafficking thing.

[B4UTRUST]

But Josh, nobody *NEEDS* more than 10 rounds! And if you're in New York you only need 7! Obviously you're some dirty child-killing mass murdering sicko terrorist wannabe who hates children, freedom and America if you think otherwise. Nobody has any reason at all, ever, for needing more than that.

I'm still laughing at people wanting a hard limit on how much ammo someone can have at one time. Like there is any possible way to really reliably track that sort of thing.

The entire gun-control feelgood politics bullshit happening these last few months just needs to be dead and gone.

[frigidmagi]

It's easier to sell bullets under the table then a weapon, so that's a problem.

[B4UTRUST]

Plus, realistically, how are you going to track and monitor the total amount of ammo that any one person has? And what constitutes too much ammo? 500 rounds? 1000? Is that 500 rounds of one type of ammo or all ammo total? Are you going to go door to door and inspect our gun cabinets for our ammo? Count our spent brass? But yet some people are shouting that it's needed. It's another one of those things that sounds good on paper but just can't be done and wouldn't solve anything anyway.

[Josh]

Which sums up the entirety of 'common sense gun control', a phrase that mercifully seems to finally be dying out.

[Hotfoot]

The strange thing is, with certain changes in technology, it may well soon be easier to track people's ammunition purchases than the guns that they have.

[B4UTRUST]

The strange thing is, with certain changes in technology, it may well soon be easier to track people's ammunition purchases than the guns that they have.

Possibly, but unless they start writing it down when you pay cash it won't be 100% effective(not that anything is) and that also probably doesn't account for reloads of ammo. I can go to the range and scavenge brass for my guns and reload them in addition to my own brass that I keep and reload. It can be accounted for partially by accounting for reload purchases but you're talking anywhere from 100-500 rounds per reload box depending on size, make, etc. That just tells you they have the capability of reloading that many rounds, not how many they actually have loaded or could load. For that you'd have to track primers, powder and brass. The first two could theoretically be done, the third is highly unlikely. As I said, I can go to the range and scavenge extra brass which would throw counts off for what I have on hand, or I could fire steel jacketed rounds(cheap Russian crap that it is) which is unreloadable but might throw off any theoretical counts as well.

So yeah, it may be easier to track than guns at some point but honestly probably not worth the effort, time or money. It's not like we're implementing Dredd style DNA trackers quite yet where there may be a point to it.