H.R. 1022 would reauthorize the assault weapons ban.
Detailed Summary
Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007 - Reinstates for ten years repealed criminal provisions regarding assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices (the assault weapons ban).
Revises the definition of "semiautomatic assault weapon" to include conversion kits (for converting a firearm to such a weapon) and any semiautomatic rifle or pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and that has specified characteristics, including a telescoping stock.
Prohibits the transfer of such a weapon except through a licensed dealer or a state or local law enforcement agency, subject to specified requirements. Directs the Attorney General to: (1) establish and maintain a record of the make, model, and date of manufacture of any such weapon which the Attorney General is made aware has been used in relation to a crime, and of the nature and circumstances of the crime involved; and (2) annually submit the record to Congress and make it available to the public.
Prohibits: (1) the transfer of any assault weapon with a large capacity ammunition feeding device; and (2) a licensed manufacturer, importer, or dealer who transfers such a device that was manufactured on or before this Act's enactment from failing to certify to the Attorney General, within 60 days of the transfer date, that the device was manufactured on or before that date. Sets forth penalties for violations.
Prohibits: (1) the transfer of such a weapon or device to a juvenile; and (2) the importation of such a device.
Status of the Legislation
Latest Major Action: 3/19/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Points in Favor
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)
Points Against
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
Visitor Comments
Bryan
This bill is unconstitutional and should be shot down (pun intended) right now. I consider the 1st and 2nd Amendments to be vital in protecting the others. This is a thinly veiled attack on the 2A and with the 2A the 1st and all the others will soon fall.
AndyC
I don't trust any government which wants to remove my 2A rights - and for the reporters out there, it's the 2A which protects your 1A rights, like it or not.
JRod
This bill is the '94 AWB but with new definitions. A firearm now only needs ONE banned feature, not two to be banned. Pistol grips are redefined as "a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip" i.e. any grip. These will be banned:
All semi-auto rifle with a detachable. (Except .22 cal.)
All semi-auto shotguns.
All pistol magazines over 10 rounds. (incl. internal)
MD
If you ban firearms entirely, people will find other ways to kill each other, in Africa where the GOVERNMENT confiscated firearms, PEOPLE turned to other tools, namely the machete, the machete worked just as well in Rwanda as firearms did.
Dj from NV
Gun control is not about guns, nor crime, its about control. Control of citizens so they can be ruled.
Socialist in DC who propose this and other anti 2A laws violate their oath to the constitution. They should be removed from office, by force if necessary.
AB
I thought I still lived in America where we had rights.
Mark
Apparently some in Congress think that the phrase "the right of the people" in the Second Amendment is not the same as the phrase "right of the people" in both the first and fourth amendments.
Do not let the Congress disarm the citizenry! The founding Fathers would find such a notion abhorrent.
TENNESSEE
The only person who fears an armed citizenry is the crooked politician. This was Hitlers first step against the Jews. Grab their guns. Vote no to the gun grabbers.
Ted
Take real action! Write your representatives, tell them how you fell and tell how this bill goes completely against the Constitution!
Contact your Rep. here: http://www.house.gov/writerep/
RW from CT
I'm writing in response to the Assault Weapons Ban, I'm a avid firearms collector/shooter. I also belong to a Shooting Association also sponsored by the NRA (National Rifle Association).
I am really concerned about the sport I have lived with since I was 9 years old.
It's a shame that their are thugs in this country that has to ruin it for us Law Abbiding Citizens.
Russ
The 94 AWB in no way regulated the lethality of weapons. It was a rediculous, cosmetic law that prohibited "scary looking" firearms. Bringing back this obsurd law is not going to curb crime. We have bigger fish to fry in this country, I think. The democrats will probably move to legalize assault weapons for illegal immigrants only. Pull your heads from your rectums, please.
Terry
Restriction on which type of firearms law abiding citizens can own has no affect on crime! Crimes are commited by NON-law abiding citizens! Therfore HR 1022 is not only unconstitutional but would be a complete failed attempt at fixing one of our nations problems.
Jeff
This is a direct infringement of the 2nd Amendment. The 1994 AW ban has already proved that such restrictions have no effect when it comes to lowering homicide rates.
The LAST thing we need is for the Government and the Police to have all the guns.
I shall quote the Constitution:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
David
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater … confidence than an armed man." –Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and punishment (1764).
McEowen
Support for a so-called "assault weapons bill" is a pretty good substitute for an intelligence test (or honesty test). Military style semi-automatic firearms are no "deadlier" than any other semi-automatic firearm with a traditional appearance. The previous ban did nothing to prevent crime. In short it accomplished nothing. Neither would another similar ban. Those who support such methods are either ignorant, disingenuous, dishonest, ill-informed or merely pandering to others that share these qualities. There is no logical/rational justification for such legislation.
OIF Vet
This ban is unconstitutional, unpatriotic and overall unacceptable. The 1994 ban had zero effect on crime. The only people this ban will disarm are the law abiding citizens. Fear your government when they want to outlaw ANY legally owned firearms. It is nice to know I've served 19 years in the army to enable this countries anti-gun crowd to stomp on my 2nd Amendment BILL OF RIGHTS!
Joe H
The 94 AWB did nothing to reduce crime, and this one will not either. This Bill is about control, not about crime.
The 2nd Admendment is not about the National Guard.
John
God, what part of "shall not be infringed" don't they understand? How about we focus on the real problems our nation faces like the southern border, the budget, jobs going overseas...You know the real issues.
AZ-Mike
Great comments everyone, you said pretty much everything I wanted to say except one thing. It looks like the bill as currently written has no grandfather clause, meaning we will have to surrender the firearms we already have.
I would also like to add a quote by George L. Roman: I am convinced we can do to guns what we've done to drugs: create a multi-billion dollar underground market over which we have absolutely no control.
Another OIF Vet
I served to protect America's citizens and their rights. I have to wonder why the rights of the law-abiding are under attack.
Disarmed we are all soft targets for those who will have weapons wether they are banned or not. This is a step in that direction.
If this passes we are headed to an America where criminals have a free pass to do what they want without fear.
It is your duty as elected representatives to protect our rights. You do not have the authority to take them away. Maybe you all should take the time to consider just what your job really is.
Ray
It is really sicking that citizens need to go through this again. I would hope that politicians with any sense would cut this off. It is proven fact that this type of law does not cut crime rate. How many times have a Cracker Barrel etc been robbed with a ak, mp5 etc.
The type of weapons that are being on radar are the ones that basically are owned lawfully at this time.
Wasn't it steps like the ones being tried that also started Nazi Germany. If anything, the 86 MG bill should be abolished
CTX
I do not support this bill. It is a violation of the Constitution.
Alex
What happened to "the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
I will not support this bill, and I will actively vote against any politician who supports this bill.
Mark
I serve in the US Army. If politicians want to allow these type of authoritarian bills in the country I am fighting for, and take away my freedom. Then this will be my last tour in Iraq and I will move out of this country upon returning.
David
I understand what they think they are trying to accomplish: to make things safer, fewer deaths, etc. - but they always fail to acknowledge that the criminals do not heed gun laws, do not register, do not have waiting period, etc. Only the law-abiding citizens are affected - not crime.
Aaron
There's enough history of gun control in the US to prove that it does not reduce crime or improve public safety. These reps. don't "mean well" at all. They want a disarmed populace that is easier to scare and, therefore, control.
mitch shrader
This treason shall not be tolerated, for the sake of my childrens rights. Thank you.
rikky
This bill is rediculous to say the least. They should enforce the current laws on the criminals, NOT make new laws that turn ordinary people into outlaws. The only reasons they want to do this is because they are scared to go after the real criminals and they live by the "I don't like it, so it should be banned." view.
JOE
Someone please explain to me , how did ADOLF HITLER return from the dead and start a Fourth Reich in America ? Did I sleep THAT late this morning ? Oh, my mistake, I was thinking HITLERY CLINTON !
Jason
I do not support this bill or anyone that does for the following reasons:
1. It is a direct violation of the Constitution. 'Nuff said.
2. The ban is based on cosmetics and ignorant fear, rather than any legitimate reason such as lethality or function. Assault weapons are very rarely used in violent crimes (less than 0.25%).
3. Overall, gun control is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to garner votes. I will never support a politician that believes in it, and will do all that is in my power to see him or her removed from office. Gun control legislation DOES NOT WORK--it actually has the opposite effect (think Washington DC).
This bill will be defeated. We let the 94 bill pass because we were unprepared. Attention "gun grabbers": we've learned from our past mistakes, and it WILL NOT happen again.
Mr. F pt. 1
Rep. McCarthy's husband was gunned down and her son severely wounded. AS terrible as that is, that gives no foundation for the violation of the Constitution.
While we are at it, let Congress know that we want the National Firearms Act repealed as well as the Gun Control Act of 1968 and The Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986. All of which are just as unconstitutional as this.
The 2A does not support explicitly your right to hunt. It does not explicitly support your right to Self-Defense. Implicitly these rights are contained though. Did not Jefferson say that disarming a man only makes him more open to attack by criminals? Yes he did. But these topics derail us from the original intent of the amendment. By doing so it has led people astray making restrictions seem more palatable.
Mr. F pt. 2
The 2A ensures that we have a right to be armed. We are the ones the Government is afraid of and rightly so for an armed citizenry prevents the loss of Liberty! "Liberty" is a word that has lost importance in our day. Some will argue that general citizens can no longer oppose so powerful a Government with tanks and F-16s, etc. But look at the Iraq insurgency! They are an underground militia who are doing quite well against such an Army. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"! Congress: STOP passing laws that infringe the right to bear arms. Stop repeating history. Stop this treason.
Gregory
...Are you kidding me America? When you ban guns, the only people who own them are CRIMINALS. If you'll remember Hitler disarmed Germany before he went through and imposed his Nazi agenda. Thanks liberals, I guess you missed out where crime went up when the ban was introduced in 1994.
Spike
the purpose of this bill is to stop crime?
IF YOU OUTLAW GUNS, ONLY OUTLAWS WILL HAVE THEM!
the people who commit "street crimes" dont usually do so with legally owned firearms. this is completly unacceptable.
Chris
Futile and wrong in the first place.1.7% of criminals where in possession of Military style assault weapons according to the DOJ.
T Rector
How about repealing the 1968 GCA and the Machine Gun Ban amendment to the 1986 FOPA instead?
Clutch
These next few years will see the most extensive atack on the 2nd Amendment with bills such as these. The Supreme Court must speak to our constitution all the while, the UN sits awaiting the outcome.
Kyle
This bill is going to not effect violent crime. In the hands of a criminal even the simplest things can be a weapon. It effects the legal law abiding gun owners the most. The voices of those who own firearms legaly and have no intent to harm others with them need to be heard.
Sue Worchester
Here's a link to Suzanne Hupp's previous testimony to congress on legislation to ban modern rifles:
http://www.washingtonceasefire.com/content/view/23/35/
Another Deployed Guy
This bill is a criminal attack on a basic right. If not fought in committee, or on the floor of the House and Senate, it will be fought in the streets and homes of American citizens.
Marshall Mayes
Why dont we sell New York and California to Europe? They seem to like the same things. The state controling everything.
Concerned Citizen
"They" are making their move to disarm the citizenry. Time and time again, history has shown what happens after you disarm the populace from an out-of-control govt. It is clear now, who is for the people and those who wish to erode our constitutional rights. Rights that are guarenteed and that cannot be taken away from us, because "we", the people, give the power to the govt and not the other way around.
This is a power grab.
freedomlover
Does anyone remember the North Hollywood shootout? That was the incident in which two criminals wreaked havoc with almost every gun banned by federal AND California law. It happened three years AFTER the "Clinton Gun Ban" passed in 1994! Despite proof of this gun ban failing to live up to its anti-crime claims, so many people FAILED to learn this!
The "Clinton Gun Ban" was also full of irrationality, ignorance and repression. H.R. 1022 is also like that, but goes even further.
Why is history repeating itself? What will it take for sanctimonious arrogant politicians to respect our Constitutionally affirmed rights and leave us law abiding citizens the hell alone?!
neophyte
As a dog that returns to his vomit, so do democrats return to their folly.
An OIF/OEF Vet
This is an insulting, and most importantly, UNCONSTITUTIONAL, bill, and should never be allowed to pass. If something like this can pass, then all our rights could follow. Americans need to learn to stand up again, and not sit idly by until something threatens our sense of "CONVENIENCE". Those who do support this bill, and others like them, should be evicted at the earliest opportunity
Americunning
If you're elected to uphold and defend the US Constitution, then why do you spend your entire term destroying it??? Could it be you have chronic case of 'treasonousSCUMitis'??
Rod
GEORGE MASON SAID BEST; To disarm the people(is)the best and most effectual way to enslave them...NOAH WEBSTER Before a standing army can rule,the people must be disarmed. This is what the elite in congress would like to do to us.They want TRANNY!!!
Stunned
Unbelievable. Not one comment for pro-control. I think we should pass this law. It basically bans almost everything that makes politicians afraid. It prepares the US for a socialist takeover, where the government can decide what you do for a living and who will raise your children. It takes us back to the day when the English once ruled with fear and intimidation. It empowers the state and allows the overthrow of the Constitution. It will finally allow the US to fall under complete jurisdiction of the UN. Then you can unwillingly pay for the poor and all men can live an equal life.
...and why are we not file treason charges against these legislators??? Tell me that...
odie
THERE BACK!
Ken
Please don't allow the law abiding citizen to become helpless against criminals who will be better armed. Citizens can protect themselves better than law enforcement officals.
Don
As a police officer in Guam which is a U.S. Territory, I am disheartened again by what members of Congress are trying to do again. Did'nt they learn from the last time, that gun control is a dead issue and will ruin their career in Congress? Banning this so called assault weapons will not deter crime or prevent deaths. oh, and by the way, this are not assault weapons. They look like them but they don't have the full capabilities (Auto-fire) as true assault weapons. I think its time that this nincompoops check their dictionary of what an assault weapon is. Cheezzz..People have been killed in motor vehicle accidents..What's next? Ban cars?
Rob
How ignorant are our Representatives?
The reason that the 94 ban was not re-instated was that somebody with a little sense did some research and discovered that guess what? Didnt change crime a bit!!
MR/s. House Rep: If you want to make this country safer, do something that will directly affect the LAW ABIDING and VOTING citizens of this country: ADDRESS IMMIGRATION!!
These weapons that you are so scared of have actually been used in very few crimes. Of those crimes only 2 have been used that were legally owned.
By definition an "Assault" weapon is a weapon that has "selective" fire capability. IE full automatic fire. These full automatic fire weapons have been controlled by a class 3 license since 1938.
LEGALLY OBTAINED AND OWNED WEAPONS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM!!!
I for one take this attempted ban as a direct assault on our Second Admendment.
Is there a part of the statement "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" that you do not understand?
Sniperjoe
This bill is totaly disusting. I mean come on , who ever heard of a criminal that obeyed the law. The 94 ban was a total disgrace also and was repaled because morons realized that the crime rate didnt change at all (and assault rifles are also used in less than 1% of crime. As an american, NRA member and a law biding gun owner this is a total attack on my rights as well as all other law biding americans rights. If this bill gets passed i will have to leave the country.
MF
It is important to note that an Assault Weapon is not the same as an "Assault Rifle." An assault rifle refers to what is commonly known as a machine gun. They too are unconstitutionally restricted. But an assault weapon is a semi-automatic device or whatever new laws they make to define it.
Heath
As a Correction Officer I am around convicted felons every day. Criminals already have guns, do you think by banning firearms, criminals will turn their illegal guns in? The only people who will suffer this ban will be law abiding people. Blaming guns for killing people, would be like blaming a pencil for misspelled words. People wake up, if you're a gun owner or not, this is taking your rights away! God forbid something bad ever happens to you and you feel like a prisoner in your own home, it will be too late for you to buy a gun. In case of fire, you have a fire extinguisher, in case someone breaks into your home, WHAT DO YOU HAVE FOR THAT?I cannot imagine the outcome if firearms are banned, can anyone say Civil War? you can take my guns from me when you pry them from my cold dead hands!
GTX
Most of the firearms I own are covered on that bill. Bush said he would sign any new AWB bill that hit his desk. I am starting to think with the Democrats taking over could make it hard to own nice firearms. Ammo has gone up to the point that its better to stock pile than to shoot. I hope it does not pass. Everytime I find some thing fun to do. They pass a hundred laws on it.
BAK
When will this country wake up and kick these commies... err I mean Democrats out? This is just another first step in trying to ban all firearms. Once they take your guns away they will take all your other rights away and then we will all hold hands and sing kumbya together in their socialist commie utopia. WAKE UP AMERICA.
Gramps
The Government is not vastly different from pre-war Germany. The Germans had democracy and free elections and later their firearms were registered and theitr pistols outlawed and taken from them then their long guns were outlawed and taken from them. then the final solution was started and millions were imprisoned and exterminated. Al Gore stated time for a change a few years ago. How quickly we are loosing our rights how easily people were fooled into voting for these Democrats again. They will destroy us all.
Jeremy
If you haven't already done so, please join the NRA. Their sole purpose in life is to protect our 2nd amendment rights and stop bad legislation such as this. They lobby on our behalf.
michael granger
“Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain
hands of the people" (Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788)
One cannot submit such a bill and "support and defend" the Constitution as they have sworn to do. If not treason it is at least sufficient cause to be removed from office,
Ernie
Why does the Gov't want to disarm its citizens? To save lives? Bull!Ban smoking, you'll save hundreds of thousands of lives every year.
AZ Al
This Bill Violates the 2nd Amendment right of all citizens of this country, no matter that they care about that right or not. Once the teeth of our Constitution is gone all other rights will follow. By the way, Article I. section 9 "No bill of Attainer or ex post facto Law shall be passed." What happened to this statement??? Congress violated the constitution Section 9 with the passage of the Domestic Violance law and no one seems to care that a misdemeanor will take away your second amendment right plus its retroactive of the past, I guess section 9 was deleted from the Constitution and no one was advised.
andrew
They can take my gun from my cold dead hands
pwhited
RW from CT said:
"It's a shame that their are thugs in this country that has to ruin it for us Law Abbiding Citizens."
And how the hell can you read this stupid code at the bottom??
Yes, there are thugs in this country ruining it for law abiding people, and they were recently elected to office. Once the 2nd Amendment is defeated, we will no longer be citizens, we will be SUBJECTS.
Josh
I didnt know the 2nd ammendment read
" A high dollar shotgun, being nescessary to bag a deer, the right of the rich to own 4 to 5 figure shotguns shall not be infringed"
The 2nd ammendment isnt about hunting!!! Its about keeping the government in check.
Save a criminal, ban a gun
MAX
As a member of we the people, which is the forth branch of our form of government,Iam not obligated to obey unconstitutional laws,and iam compelled by duty to ever be vigalent.
MtL
Listen folks!!! We have all heard the saying “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” With that being said if this bill is passed we can rewrite this age old saying and put it on my tombstone “I was killed by a person, with a gun, that was banned by my Government.” I will be the first in line to give up my GUNS only if every single criminal out there will give up theirs also. So since that is never going to happen, I will be the first person to say I WILL NOT EVER and I repeat EVER GIVE UP MY 2A OR MY GUNS!!!! People should not fear their government their government should fear them….
TheBull
This isn't going to work with me.It's my right as a citizen of the this fine country,and I obey the law,those jerk offs in washington are trying to take everthing away including your freedom.Go to,infowars.com and find out the truth,about everything,also prisonplant.com,then maybe americans will wakeup.
Sal
The guns are out there whether the government likes it or not and since it is illegal to enter someones property to look for them they are very difficult to find until after they are used in a crime. The ban is illogical as a means to stop firearm related crime. Besides, the number 1 firearm used to commit crimes in this country is the 38 calibre revolver. This is all just political posturing to appear tough on crime. What we should do is establish capital punishment for anyone that is convicted of comitting a crime that involves the use of a weapon (firearn or otherwise). Let's eliminate those within our society that would place the lives of others at risk for their own gain.
Tony
They want to save lives... then make a law that makes it illegal to manufacture a vehicle that goes over 65 mph..oh wait THEY drive sports cars.
Georgia
they was no decline in crime during the clinton ban. so why even try to reenforce it. makes no sense.
Don
The rise and fall of the Roman Empire. See any parallels? Wake up people and take our beloved country back from these self centered and self serving idiots packing for their treasonous acts! Our apathy will be our downfall!
George
We need to elect government officials that have got the guts to say “NO” when the majority of the people whom they represent tell them to say “NO”, and actually put that body of people’s interest first and foremost. Instead they are introducing new laws like, H.R. 1022, aka: Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007 that have a greater negative effect on the law abiding citizen than it will ever have on the criminals within our society (Remember what a criminal is? They are people who do not care about the laws…Duh).
Jim
I am STRONGLY against this bill. I have always thought there is a fine line between law enforcement (government) and criminals. Now I truely believe it.
conrad
there is a reason why that stupid womens bills never pass, they are mostly uncontitional and stupid if this one passes it will be a first and if it does everyone will be very mad
John
Americans vote like sheep, either Republican or Democratic. Continuing to vote that way will get the same wealthy, entrenched elitists in power who look out for themselves. That includes disarming you with H.R.1022. It's time to vote for parties who still believe in rule by Constitutional law. Libertarian, Green, whoever. Would the ruling elite allow an election where most Democrats and Republicans were soundly replaced? Probably not. Let's find out by changing the voting habits of America. But in the meantime, stash all of those guns and ammo in a safe place. And don't forget the first half of the 2nd A;A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State. That's you, every able bodied person in America. Get involved, get trained, just in case those in power refuse to concede election defeat.
Patriot
The Second Amendment protects all other rights, given by our Creator, and must be protected by whatever means are available to us. This attempt at disarming the people is obviously another step toward the socialization of American society. I call to arms all who read this to safeguard our freedom up to and including armed resistance.
Daniel
Stupid democrats dont uderstand the term "shall not be infringed"
Jason
On December 7, 1993 Colin Ferguson boarded a Long Island commuter train and began shooting the passengers with a Ruger P-89 9mm pistol. The incident known as the Long Island Railroad Massacre resulted in six people being killed and 19 injured. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy lost her husband and her son was injured. Jim Brady was shot with a 22lr revolver after an assasanation attempt on Ronald Regan. Let recap Ruger 9mm handgun and a 22 revolver equals the need to band a different type of gun?
Steven
I want to own an AR15 and a AK47 style rifle, for all lawfull purposes! By banning these types of firearms you are infringing on my right to own them, there for this bill is illegal under the second amendment!
Louie
This is what the democrats are worried about? Lets see something done about health care or social security. Let's leave are 2nd amendment rights alone.
Sarah
Addition to Jason's Responce above: My parents were killed in a car weck while driving home. The driver of the other vehicle was a 16 year old kid showing off his dads Ford mustang. So does that mean we should ban Honda? Banning a semi-auto weapon because you dont think we need it sounds like living under a dictatorship not a Free country!
Christopher
Our founding fathers set up a pretty sweet deal for us. They pretty much said "We earned freedom so here are some rules to insure that we remain free." In doing so they set up a rule to ensure all others. The second amendment was put in place for a reason.
This is going to read pretty primal but this is how I feel. This is America, we have rights here. NO ONE can take those away. You people who want to ban our firearms are lucky we let you get away with what you do. You people are lucky that WE ALLOW the regulations you already have ASKED US for.
The only people who are going to follow these laws are law abiding citizens. DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THIS? We do! WE see right through the Bulls***.
If you dont like the America our Founding fathers set up for us then get the hell out!
Teri
I'm a Democrat and I think the law is unconstitutional. I'm contacting my representative about it.
David Martin
Another bill aimed to target the law-abding citizens and one that does nothing to stop gun violence as anyone knows that criminals are stubborn as they never seem to obey the law.
Hollywood
we are given the rights to possess firearms for the sake of protecting ourselves from an overpowering government, the right to own firearms is the safety net of the checks and balances system, now their trying to tie our hands behind our backs.
Aaron
The "pistol grip" provision is especially funny. They cite that it is a feature that helps spraying fire from the hip. Have anyone who supports the bill tried to hold a pistol grip rifle at waist level? The truth is just the opposite - it is harder to hold and fire from waist level. Can you say "Cosmetic Ban".
Rob
We need to introduce a bill that bans the use of false terminology used to incite fear. The term "Assault Weapon" has a definition used by the military (not a rifle but explosive weapons that aid in an assault). The anti-gun crowd adoption of the term is incorrect. The bill should be called the "Rifle and shotgun with certain characteristics that are not automatic weapons ban". The bill has nothing to do with automatic weapons which are already regulated.
Pete
But if this bill passes, at least an assailant won't be able to legally stab at my corpse with a bayonet after shooting me 10 times. I can guarantee you that when I see a wooden stock on his rifle, I will not be scared at all. If he had a wooden stock, I would even ask the attacker to be my friend. Don't you know that deer rifles cannot hurt humans? It is the pistol grip that puts more spin on the round, thus allowing it to penetrate human skin. Upon opening, the folding stock makes a distinct sound causing human victims to stop in thier tracks.....Why do these people have thier heads so far up ..........
Deputy D. Mason
When will they finally realize that it DOES NOT matter what you ban... the bad guys will still have any weapon they want. Anyone willing to commit a felony will not care about a weapons ban...PERIOD!
mike lewis
This bill is nothing short of communism. Don't we have a 2nd ammendment. How does one legislate the constitution without an ammendment? Big brother is here and it's time to slow these lunitic lawmakers down. Vote them out and send them home. Next they will legislate camera's in the home
John
While ignorant individuals like Mrs. McCarthy may be elected to Congress by even more ignorant Americans and allowed to introduce legislation that is clearly unconstitutional, such as H.R. 1022, other, more responsible representatives, such as Ron Paul introduce legislation to protect the rights of Americans: See H.R. 1096 "H.R. 1096: To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans"
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1096
Rob
I like that m.lewis "nothing short of communism". We should label those who argue against the 2nd Amendment as an individual right as the "Communist Anti-2nd Amendment Crowd". Turn about is fair play since they labeled our semi-firearms as "Assault Weapons".
Mark
This Bill just gained 12 Co-Sponsors yesterday! Go call them and tell them and inform them of their rape of the Constitution.
Rep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5] - 3/7/2007
Rep Crowley, Joseph [NY-7] - 3/7/2007
Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] - 3/7/2007
Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] - 3/7/2007
Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 3/7/2007
Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 3/7/2007
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14] - 3/7/2007
Rep Meehan, Martin T. [MA-5] - 3/7/2007
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 3/7/2007
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 3/7/2007
Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-29] - 3/7/2007
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] - 3/7/2007
Tom
Hitler and Stalin would be proud
Mainer
Funny how the most dangerous place is the place with the most gun control: Prison. Think about it. Don't be a victim. Be able to protect yourself and your family. The police just can't get there as quick as you think they will.
PSDOFF
The 2nd amendment has been eroded continually for quite some time. It has never decreased crime. The straw that broke the camel's back in the american revolution was when the british came to TAKE OUR GUNPOWDER. WAKE UP! YOUR GOVERNMENT IS COMING TO TAKE YOUR SEMI AUTOS! Ban the new ones, register the old ones, change the law later and collect the registered guns. THIS IS HOW IT IS DONE. THE CITIZENS WILL NOT BE DISARMED AND WE ARE READY TO VOTE WITH BULLETS.
Lars
Since 2004 crime with "assault weapons" has not increased. Do we need to draw a diagram or bar graph to get them to understnad the data?
More children were raped, killed and molested by pedophiles on parole than citizens shot with an assault rifle... why not concentrate on a real CRIME BILL?
Mr Schoonmaker
humans need compassion not control she should create a law that teaches all criminals compassion thru subjection to hours of national geographic videos and some form of educational movies on americas national parks that way they might have something to live for and not hurt people if this passes true to the code "over my dead body"
MaineOfficer
I am an officer of the law and do not agree with this ban. A government who wants their citizens to be disarmed is a government that is scared of thier people. In turn we as citizens on the brink of being disarmed should be scared of this government. Buy up your high capacity magazines now; you might need them later... to sell... or worse.
FoxValleyFirearms.com
Remeber fellow gunners!!!! They know that this bill wont pass....they are not stupid. They are sending out a crazy extreme bill, hoping you will settle for the less extreme bills that will folow this one.
SHAWN
Any ban on firearms is in direct violation of the 2'nd amendment. Our forefathers were wise when they added the second amendment, it is a deterrent to any oppressive government including ours if needed. It is another check and balance built into this government by our forefathers. Always be wary of anyone who wants to take away rights.
AsherDe
I have a wonderful idea. Double the penalties for using a gun in a crime and leave the law abiding alone.
Mr. F
Asherde,
If you can get death for murder what makes you think doubling the penalties for gun crime will work? It wont. Violent criminals do not care about laws of this nature save that they weaken us.
D FROM SPOKANE
What happen to the right to bare arms,Congress thinks they need to control us like Hitler and Stallen controlled there countrys
John
Yeah, yeah ... they banned drugs too. Look how well that's working out.
D-Rock
The term `pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip. doesnt that pretty much rule out all semi-auto rifles because they have a feature that "can function as a grip". Everyone needs to start writing their congressman, especially those of you who's U.S. Rep is cosponsoring this bill. Let them know that we will not stand for this.
I agree with DG from Nv, you know it!!!
Gun control is not about guns, nor crime, its about control. Control of citizens so they can be ruled.
Socialist in DC who propose this and other anti 2A laws violate their oath to the constitution. They should be removed from office, by force if necessary.
Mike
Ok, this was clearly shown to be a failure before. So, can anyone tell me what the definition of doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results, is? Exactly.
AC
Oops, I hit the wrong button saying I was for it ... wrong I am dead set against this bill. I don't need more nanny state control taking over and running (ruining) my life. One thing I know is a gun in my hands in better then a cop on the phone. Bans don't work. Someday there will be a backlash against the so called progressives (liberals). The right to arms is the 2nd amendment for a reason. It is there to preserve all the other amendments.
Michelle Cannizzaro
I believe this bill goes against our Constitutional rights to bear arms.
man of the people
I would support this bill, as long as it applies equally to members of Congress, their bodyguards, and the congressional security force. Let's start by completely banning guns in Washington, D.C., without exception.
RageNRepublican
This bill is not only unconstitutional, it's a step towards socialism, and dictatorship. A2 has NOTHING to do with duckhunting, it's to protect Americans from people like McCarthy who insist on widdling away at our rights. If it's time to bury our guns, it's time to dig them up.
Freedom Defender
Those of us in the military took an oath to uphold and defend the constitution against all threats foreign and domestic. This is a domestic threat threat against the foundations of our freedoms and our ability to defend those freedoms. Its time to start preparing to defend those freedoms. Liberals and democrats say that assault weapons are only designed to kill large numbers of people...then why do they only want the government to have them. In a way they are right, shotguns and bolt action rifles designed for hunting are not effective weapons to fight with. Every citizen should be armed with weapons effective enough to at least have a chance of fighting back.
????
I fully understand them banning automatic weapons but not semiauto.
ChrisW
TO QUOTE: “You won’t get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens. There’s only one way to get real gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up, and if you don’t actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a long time... It’s a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun controllers. I happen to know this from personal experience.” —Ronald Reagan, 1983
Cliff
I am a Federal Law Enforcement officer, and the Liberals DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME !!!
NO BAN !!! DO NOT STRIP OUR RIGHTS!!!
freedomfighter
wow,mcarthy think's she's smarter than ALL of our founding father's!i think incompetent person should be removed from office before she has any more opportunities to screw up our (and our children's)country with her non-existant logic.she has her agenda because someone shot her family member's.well maybe if a law abiding citizen was carrying a legal pistol thank day,her tragedy could have been averted.wake up america,the politician's are turning us into slaves right before our very eyes and all everyone wants to talk about is k-fed and brittany,or anna nicole.the very fabric of our country is disintegrating in front of us as these politician's tighten their grip.the destruction of the foudation of our country should not be tolerated.
TruePatriot
I can guarantee that anyone, criminal or otherwise who tries to take away my legally-owned firearms will have a very bad day.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ.
TacticalTailgate
hr 1022 is NOT legal and will NOT be tolerated or accepted by law abiding, freedom loving citizens, such as myself!
George Bush
I would like you to know I agree with you and will not allow congress to push America around.
they are NOT getting my stash of illegal weapons!!!!!
kstone
I totally believe in the Constitution of the United Staes. When our elected officials swore an oath they promised to SUPPORT and Defend the Constitution of the United States as a whole not pick and choose what ammendment is good or bad. Apparently the oath was just empty words.
2008 is just around the corner it's time to vote the Liberals out of office it's time to vote for a Congress that will turly support and defend the Constitution.
TBone MD
This is kind of like declawing your cat and then putting him in a cage with a rabid bulldog. I think the way to control the violence committed using these types of weapons, is to punish the criminals that use them. Let's not leave the general law abiding citizens that own them. I do not currently own any type of "assault weapon" but do not feel that I should be restricted from it in the future. Please vote this one down, it will only strengthen the criminal syndicates, and the federal government.
H Glover
Pro-gunners need to stick together and defeat these liberal pinheads. They want to ban all guns. We can not let them get a foot in the door. JOIN the NRA.
R Schneider
Well if this go through, I will be like Charleston Heston, they will have to take them out of my dead cold hands.
Ando
I agree with "Freedom Defender". Those of us in the military took an oath to uphold the Constitution against all threats foreign and domestic. I would say that this is indeed a domestic threat as these so called Reps. erode our Constitutional rights in which they obviously know nothing about.
AKowner47
Well I can sum it up like this. H.R. 1022: Assault Weapons Ban is nothing more than a law to treat law abiding gun owners as Terrorists,Out Laws and Criminals. VOTE NO TO H.R. 1022.
Vince Rafaiani
I would be in favor of this law if a politition could supply a good answer to my question : "Why?" But that won't happen because every argument they can supply is based on emotion and false pretenses. This is another lame attempt disarm the American people. I am still trying to figure out why these ignorant liberals are trying to disarm us law abiding citizens. Do they think they can create a utopia? The Soviet Union already tried that and look at Russia now, they have a dictatorship! If these liberals want a communist government, they should get on a boat and leave the democratic land of the free!
Hank Kokenzie
How many people are killed with automatic weapons in the U.S. ????
Hank kokenzie
Let me change this to, How many people are killed with Fully Automatic Weapons?
Mr. F
Hank, An Assault Weapon is not the same as an Assault Rifle which is what is commonly called a machine gun.
Machine guns are already heavily restricted under the NFA of 1934, which is unconstitutional as well.
Butcho Loco
I knew this was going to happen with a democrat controlled congress, and I am pissed. I was not planning on buying any new guns this year, and now I am reconsidering. We got fight back hard on this one, no repeat of the 94 AWB should be allowed to happen. We have to hit the streets, petition, write, call our reps, especially the ones that will support this draconian legislation . Even more important though, we have to change the opinions of those who are afraid of guns, or ignorant of them. We all know some, go for the easy targets first (ha, ha pun!). You know, the ones that are unsure about guns, take 'em shootin! Teach them all you know about guns! Turn them into one of us! We need the extra voices, we must have a strong presence!!! I have converted people, it can be done!!!
Amie
They are just guns. What I want to know is how many of you live in a CITY where gun control is a necessity. They aren't taking away your rights, they're protecting those of us who have to live in fear of these guns everyday. Also - as suburbs quickly become "edge cities" you are going to have to worry about this as well. So maybe you should think about your community instead of worrying about whether or not you can keep a certain kind of gun in your closet.
Sniperjoe
Amie, gun control is not a necessity, it is unconstitutional. What I and everyone else that has posted beisdes you is that criminals do not obey the law, thus can get their hands on whatever gun they want very easily and almost all of these guns come in illegaly from other countrys such as Russia, Saudi arabia etc. Also , if bans did work why would you ban something that is used in less that 1% of the crime nationaly. It would be much more effective if gun control worked to ban handguns but the reality is is that it doesnt. As a matter of fact, more people are saved by guns ( about 3 people are save to every 1 murder) alot more than people are murdered by them.
Marine
Amie, these are not just guns, they are part of the heritage and culture of the United States. You might as well propose banning Violent Video games and Rap music because of its supposed "negative" influence on America's youth. As has been said numerous times here already, criminals are criminals because they ignore the law. This law will NOT deter crime, in fact it will create a whole new class of criminal. It's a bad, and nothing good will come of it.
ChanceLonestar
this story was added to digg, log in and digg it! it needs media attention!
4sarge RET LEO - IN
"DITTO"
What happened to "the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
I will not support this bill, and I will actively vote against any politician who supports this bill.
Lee from sd
I have a lot of firearms that would go against regualtions on bill hr 1022..i have around 20 guns and around 10-11 would be banned. I am a pround NRA supporter and believe that passing hr1022 would be taking away our rights...this is America and were run under a democracy not communism or socialism!
Lee from sd
Aime...go hug a tree
Liberty4Ever
Two EFFECTIVE things you can do:
1) Write a real, old fashioned letter to your Congresscritter explaining why HR1022 is wrong.
2) Take someone shooting, especially kids. Show them responsible firearms ownership and make sure they understand the rights as explained in the 2nd ammendment and the importance to freedom and liberty.
SSG Schwab Coby USARMY
I think this law absolutely ridiculous. Very few crimes have been committed from legally registered assault weapons. This law is not going to affect people who would commit crimes with these kinds of weapons. The only thing it will do is make criminals not hestitate to invade the homes of honest hard working Americans because he will know there is nothing to fear.
Sniperjoe
and yes Amie, i do live in a big city, actually i happen to live in THE city and i can tell you that the high gun control is one of the main reasons for all of the crime.
Econ Professor
Historically, laws against the private ownership of weapons are not really about reducing crime, rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding. Japan had "sword control" during the later Shogunates, and it was to ensure that the nobility and their Samuri could control the peasants. New York's infamous Sullivan Law was really passed to make sure that only Tammany Hall thugs had guns on election day--the better to intimidate voters. The gun laws passed in the South after the Civil War were designed to make safe working conditions for the KKK when they came to intimidate freed slaves. The list could go on, but it would be too depressing.
Having said that, I would ask what the politicians have planned to do to the American people that makes them so afraid for us to have arms. Whatever it is, it cannot be good, and will likely be worse for our children. Remember, for an elite to be able to turn citizens into peasants and serfs, the citizens must first be disarmed.
muggs45
The statistics do not support this Bill..... Crime did not go down... I am against this Bill and I am Standing tall with the 2nd ammendment... Guns have saved my life on several occations.
OIF Medic
To my fellow OIF brothers WELCOME HOME.Unfortunately it seems the representatives of various peoples republic type states are up too their old tricks and lies again.I know I didnt fight for this.
GAT
When the government fears our arms, then we must in turn fear our government. Vote libertarian and end this insanity between democratic socialists and republicans who do not remember the definaition of conservative anymore. Reagan would be ashamed of the party the way it is now!
Brian McNerney
There exists in this world people that I would not be comfortable around, if they were even to possess a BB gun or a rubber band with a paper clip.. BUT....that being said:
A person considered to be a reasonable person, with a sound mind and can have that verified and confirmed by a backgound check and other personnel checks, would not be a problem for me or a threat to the safety of our society should they possess a firearm ....be it bolt action or semiautomatic. Pistol or long gun..
The existing laws that prohibit machine guns still being in place under 922r would be enough for me to sleep at night. Not having the current laws enforced against criminals is what keeps me awake.
Making all guns disappear in this world would not create a utopia of peace but only create a search of a substitute weapon of metal or chemicals. Then WHAT Do We Do?
OIF Engineer
This is another attempt for the Government to add additional control over law abiding citizens. What are the Libs afraid of an uprising of good people getting sick and tired of there nonsense. Nonsense things like a bunch of illegals flying our flag upside down at a school in protest to immigration control and not do anything about it. But this is ok and we should NOT say anything about that because it could hurt their feelings, of course we would be racists. I think if things in american do not change soon trouble is on the horizon. Sorry for the rambeling just had to get that off my chest
Mickey Donald
Assault weapons should be prohibited, because they were designed for military purposes; are the firearms of choice of many (not all) criminals; and aren't suitable for hunting, competitive shooting, or even self defense. Despite several legal challenges, the ban, which is now expire and Bush promised to revive (but didn't), was upheld as Constitutional by federal courts. So much for the erosion of the Second Amendment. This ban makes common sense.
Brian McNerney
As they say.... the devil is in the details.........
In this case it is in the definition of an assault weapon......
Hopefully it is explained in the details of the defintion of an assault weapon, how it is justified, as to the need to change the 2nd ammendment .....explaining why we were wrong having it in place, to start with?
RED
Mr. Donald...I hunt with mine, I use it in competitive shooting, and will defend myself and family with it if need be...
Those that beat their guns into plows will plow for those that don't.
Aussiegirl
You people are all CRAZY! I hope you are all happy with your lax gun laws after this current massacre of innocents at Virginia Tech. What on earth will it take to bring you to your senses and make you realise that guns kill, indiscriminately and quickly. If this nutcase had only had access to even a regular rifle he would have killed far less people. No-one in civilized society NEEDS an Assault weapon!!
RED
That is what Hitler told the JEWS.....
Gary
Hasn't anybody here actually READ the second amendment, it does mention a well run militia!!! DOH It simply doesn't give carte blanche for any individual to run around with automatic weapons
Brian McNerney
4-17-07
Let us assume... that we are in a time where there exists no firearms....bows and arrows.....etc. Utopia........?
Would a deranged person bent on ending many young student lives turn to a vehicle as the object to inflict death during a large outside gathering? If that would be a possibility.... Do we ban all vehicles a mile from a school area.......with cement barriers?
Evil throughout history is always accomplished by what ever is available.
Let us not examine the means used, but the cause of evil, as we cant take all manner of weapons or things which might be used as such, out of the reach of civilization.
Cars,Baseball bats..matches and gas ..Kool-aid ETC
Yes we are ALL mad at senseless killings and need to vent ...
It SHOULD NOT BE ....THE OBJECT USED , but the user and the missing safe guards to prevent it now, and in the future.
JC In Kentucky
I am not one who would normally comment on websites, but this is such an outrage I felt compelled to comment. Why would our politicians try this attack on our 2nd amendment yet again? Why are we allowing our politicians to spend our tax dollars on such a proposal? How much money has already been wasted on this obvious violation of our constitutional right? I am not an extremist but I will never relinquish control of the very few firearms I currently own.
Steve in good ol' AZ
Aussiegirl,
The gun used in the VA Tech shooting was a 9mm handgun, so that is completely irrelevant to this bill. Yes, it was a tragedy, but banning assault weapons is not the answer. Our system is designed so that the people keep the government in check. Take away the means of control, and the government no longer has to fear the people, but vice versa. People shouldn't fear their governments...governments should fear their people.
Sniperjoe
First of all, the gun used in VA wasnt an assault rifle at all, so it is compleatly irrelivent to this bill, also Gary the second amendment does mention milita, but did you ever even bother to read the whole thing? It clearly states that the people have the right to keep and bear arms and that the right cant be infringed, to make it more clear to all of you i will post it here... "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
Its all there
Slick
This makes as much sence as banning boats because people drive drunk in cars...
Brian McNerney
4-19-07
I love the internet....
You have to see this about the knowledge of this bill originator being interviewed:
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/04/18/video-carolyn-mccarthy-doesnt-und...
Dan R in N.Y.
I am a former U.S. Marine and own many types of weapons, some classified as "assault", and some not. This ban would affect nearly every gun I own from my home defense shotgun, my hunting rifles and shotguns to my AK's and AR-15's. I have never commited a crime with any of these weapons nor would I ever. The only crime being commited is by the liberal gun hating democrats who would take them away from me. An unarmed citizen no longer has rights, we would be slaves to a government who would control us, they already control nearly every facet of our lives, why give them more. We as citizens need to fight this with all we have. Politicians work for us, they get paid with our tax dollars, that means we should be ultimatly in charge and I say we start firing people.They better bring thier's when they come for mine.
Austin from Oklahoma
Carolyn McCarthy has zero credibility after her showing on MSNBC. She is politician for one reason only, to ban guns. Banning guns won't solve anything lady. Perhaps if your husband was packing on that subway, he may have survived. Stop writing emotional legislation because it only hurts the law-abiding citizens out there who have the power to stop isolated incidents from happening. They have the power to save lives. Criminals don't give a damn about your legislation.
Ordinary Citizen
FYI: It is well established that gun control regulation IS NOT in violation of the second amendment. This is not a new issue The second amendment applies to states and their militias. If you are so concerned about your gun 'rights', you are going to have to try to get a new constitutional amendment passed.
For all those concerned about Big Brother, don't you think state militias are a better check on federal power than vigilante groups?
By the way, this isn't really about or the government being afraid of it's people. This is about the government taking measures to keep people's kids from bringing their parent's machine guns to school and mowing down the entire lunchroom.
Vince
I love how people like to argue against us when they don't even know the facts(which are all on our side). Lax gun laws lead to low crime. To all the gun control advocates: when my guns are gone, what is going to stop rapists and murderers from getting weapons. If you dont like it in America quit trying to change our laws and move to England! This is America!
Sarah
Oh, please. The right to bear arms does not give us the right to bear assault weapons. These firearms didn't exist when the Constituion was written and are for the sole purpose of killing as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. I see the NRA lobby groups are alive and well. Can anyone say "Common Sense"?
Derek
This unconstitutional bill only serves to disarm law abiding citizens. Criminals don't follow the law!
jd4x4
Common sense says that criminals don't abide by laws. There Sarah, I said common sense... and actually used some.
I can't think of much else a cannon is used for except assault, and they certainly had those arms when the Constitution was written. Don't seem to find that excluded, either.
jayfive
does anyone know how many more sponsers are needed for another vote and is there a way to track this more currently?
Common sense
Anti-gun people:
Why do you want 100 pound women to physically fight 220 pound rapists?
Vet LEO and VFF
Gun ban worked on the VT campus did in it! A few years ago VT made law abiding students remove firearms from campus, only the evil criminal student was armed. Want common sense, how many of you would run into a room and wave a gun (let alone use it) if everyone in the room might have a concealed weapon? One bullet from a law abiding student would have ended all life threatening behavior from the nutjob. How many lives could have been saved if one of the victims had been armed? I am a law enforcement officer, and I would not wait on us to protect you, your family. Heart attacks kill 100,000 times as many people yet we waste limited $ resources on this garbage, instead of buying AED's. I am a vet spending part of my life defending these freedoms, why should anyone have the right to take freedom away from my child because of the actions of an evil few? Leaving him defenseless in school? After the sacrifices I have made defending their freedoms, what right do they have? None!
Vet LEO and VFF
These weapons are not, "for the sole purpose of killing as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time." A faulty exaggerated position. The ones I have owned, along with all members of the military and law enforcement community have been used for years of training on targets and only if needed to shoot people defending your freedom and our lives (millions of gun owners). Would you jepordize my life by taking away my weapons and preparation I acquired as a civilian and before taking on this hazardous duty. If so, then you can knock on the door of my family when the perp wins, and tell them daddy's not coming home. Instead of wasting breathe, why don't you buy a gun learn how to use it and then put that skill to use defending your nation and make a real difference. The world could always use a few more heros and a lot less ignorance.
Vet LEO and VFF
Constitutionally, if the founding fathers had intended for us not to have fire arms, as smart as they were, then why 200 years after the work they did do we still own them? Are we really so arrogant to think we are smarter than them. Who among you carries a title like the “father of invention?” Yet we think Jefferson and others were not intelligent enough to comprehend or communicate their point of view? They were, citizenry needs the right to bear arms because they could be called upon to form these militias and defend their nation. Midway through our nation’s history, Roosevelt with congress created programs just for that purpose, programs which are still being used today. Can’t shoot, can’t defend. That is the only reason they mentioned militias, not as the condition to bear but rather one great reason (to support national defense) which helps support our individual right to bear.
Randy
This bill should be passed immediately. How many more Virgina Techs and Columbines do we need before America takes seriously the need for gun control? The NRA "big lie" that the 2nd Amendment gives the right to own assault rifles is flat out wrong. There is no Constitutional right to bear arms except in the context of an 18th Century militia. 30,000 people die each year from shootings. No one, I repeat no one, has the right to an assault rifle (or any other gun). The NRA has lined the pockets of legislators in the past. Let's hope the Virgina Tech episode gives the Democratic Congress the courage to do the right thing and pass this bill likely over Cowboy George Bush's veto.
Randy
For all you gun freaks, read the 2nd Amendment. It doesn't give you the right to have assault rifles or other guns. It relates to the establishment of a militia in a Revolutionary Time. No one in this country should have a gun. No one. Ask the Virgina Tech student body or the parents of the Columbine kids or the 30,000 people killed each year about the myth of the "right to bear arms." The NRA's payola has made us a lawless, defenseless country. It should stop now.
Vet LEO and VFF
"Thinking that insane laws will stop insane people from doing insane things is, well, insane" - Penn Jillette. I do not appreciate Randy and his vitriolic statements about gun owners, I am law abider and upholder not a criminal. Car accidents kill about 45,000 people each would you let someone take away your car because a portion of people commit DUI's. The constitution makes no mention of you owning an automobile, what right do you have? Your number 30,000 is highly exaggerated with regard to this topic, only 1/3 of those are crime, the others are suicide. Do you really think taken guns away from either group will stop them. You probably think take away guns and we can save the money we spend on law enforcement, too. Ask Britian how well that has worked, gun ban for them equals higher violent crime rate than the U.S, though we have 5x the population.
Vet LEO and VFF
By the way Randy, assault rifles, fully automatic military weapons, are illegal in the U.S. already with current gun laws. These types of weapons killed 0 people in the examples you cited, and nearly that many for the last 100 years in the US. Wait for a Law Enforcement Officer (LEO)and you can be a defenseless statistic too. I know it is scary to imagine that their are sum among us so evil, but I would want someone like who cares about his fellow man to have the tools needed to protect my family if called upon, my family is a statistic I never want to see.
Vet LEO and VFF
Let me restate that for emphasis and clarity (typing error).
I know it is scary to imagine that their are sum among us so evil, but I would want someone like you that cares about his fellow man to have the tools needed to protect my family if called upon, my family dead is a statistic I never want to see.
Sgt. Sparks
I can't believe the Democrats are trying this again ! Really, it is time to put them back in the minority. The subject firearms are the very types we should have to protect our homes and families. Sen. DeWine of Ohio lost his re-election bid primarily because of what he said about Ohioians who owned "assault weapons." We never forgot it. We are honorable people being represented by questionable legislators. May God help us.
Thomas Jefferson
"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from man because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm those only who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, will respect the less important arbitrary ones....and which, if strictly obeyed would put a end to personal liberty?....Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; They serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence
than a armed man." - Thomas Jefferson
Sapper
Whoever said this is the extreme to sneak through lesser bills is almost definitely right. The sad thing is these folks can't seem to remember a simple old quote "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
I don't like nor trust democrats, and as a NY resident I am ashamed that Rep. Mcarthy thinks this will help.
Maybe if these folks took a look at some countries like Switzerland, and Israel to see what a modern society is capable of they would understand.
Israel has it's problems but I don't think gun crimes were one of them. As far as terrorism, that is a totally different matter.
They'll send us everywhere in the world to die needlessly, because they can't figure out that they have no business in some matters.
The only thing they are doing is paving the way for a socialist America and nothing more.
Eric
Congresswoman McCarthy doesn't seem to have garnered much support for this bill - and is there any wonder why? The Democrats won in November precisely because they ran candidates who were more conservative than their Republican contenders. The Dems know good and well that Americans who identify with "traditional conservative" values are disgusted with the leftist betrayal by the GOP in the last 6 years, which gives the opposition party a voting base they can tap. There is NO WAY the Dems will throw this away before the 2008 Presidential election by moving forward with gun-ban legislature. McCarthy spoke out of turn and has probably been reprimanded by party leadership. This bill will die in commitee. We have nothing to worry about here.
David A. Jordan
The bill defines an "assault weapon" as "A rifle ... that has ... a pistol grip." A "pistol grip" means "any ... characteristic that can function as a grip." Therefore, an assault weapon is any rifle that you can hold in your hands.
Bill
It is almost one hundred years since our illustrious government banned hardcore drugs such as heroin, and there is more coming into our country than ever before. Hasn't our government learned any lessons from this? If there is a demand, there will always be a supply. So it shall be with the demand for arms if these traitors are allowed to proceed with their one world plans.
David
IF YOUR A PATRIOT AND ESP. IF YOU LIVE IN ANY OF THE BELOW STATES. YOU NEED TO TAKE "ISSUE" W/THESE REPS. THEY REPRESENT YOU!
Gary Ackerman [D-NY]
Howard Berman [D-CA]
Lois Capps [D-CA]
William Clay [D-MO]
Joseph Crowley [D-NY]
Diana DeGette [D-CO]
William Delahunt [D-MA]
Anna Eshoo [D-CA]
Chaka Fattah [D-PA]
Bob Filner [D-CA]
Barney Frank [D-MA]
Raul Grijalva [D-AZ]
Mazie Hirono [D-HI]
Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX]
Patrick Kennedy [D-RI]
Zoe Lofgren [D-CA]
Nita Lowey [D-NY]
Carolyn Maloney [D-NY]
Edward Markey [D-MA]
James McGovern [D-MA]
Martin Meehan [D-MA]
Bradley Miller [D-NC]
James Moran [D-VA]
William Pascrell [D-NJ]
Edward Pastor [D-AZ]
Janice Schakowsky [D-IL]
Adam Schiff [D-CA]
Brad Sherman [D-CA]
Louise Slaughter [D-NY]
Ellen Tauscher [D-CA]
Christopher Van Hollen [D-MD]
Debbie Wasserman Schultz [D-FL]
Robert Wexler [D-FL]
Vet LEO and VFF
Wonder what was meant in the Bill of Rights here is a quote from the man instrumental in forcing its adoption.
"Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the *real* object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
-- Patrick Henry, speech of June 9 1788
Vet LEO and VFF
More from Patrick Henry, George Mason "The Father of the Bill of Rights" and another well known man who would agree to the U.S. Constituation only if the Bill of Rights was added.
"The great object is, that every man be armed. [...] Every one who is able may have a gun."
-- Patrick Henry, speech of June 14 1788
"To disarm the people... was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
-- George Mason, speech of June 14, 1788
That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms...
-- Samuel Adams, in "Phila. Independent Gazetteer", August 20, 1789
Vet LEO and VFF
Their can be no question as to their intention, no guessing as to their belief. Very clearly, liberty survives in our right to bear arms, no wonder it was the second amendment added.
Tom
I'm glad that I am not the only one upset about this strike against out rights given by the 2d amendment. Keep up the good work.
SKIP
No excuses for ANY Rep. or Sen. to vote in favor of this rediculous bill. Constitutionally they cannot "infringe" upon our rights to keep and bear arms of appropriate weapons of the military type at the time. Any congressional person who does wish to "INFRINGE" on our rights should be brought up on charges of HIGH TREASON against our country.
Mark
If you vote for this bill its a SLAP in the face for every American Soilder that has given their life for this country to protect our constitutional rights. You all need to revisit your legislation. If you have weapons it deters crime. Weapons dont kill people, people kill people and they dont need a gun to do it.
mikes
AZMike:
"SEC. 4. GRANDFATHER PROVISION.
Section 922(v)(2) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended--
(1) by inserting `(A)' after `(2)'; and
(2) by adding after and below the end the following:
`(B) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any firearm the possession or transfer of which would (but for this subparagraph) be unlawful by reason of this subsection, and which is otherwise lawfully possessed on the date of the enactment of this subparagraph.'."
Mike
You Gun Freaks are a bunch of morons! Why don't we all shoot each other now and get it over with!
DM
The right to bear arms is in the constitution. It was put in their to defend yourself from others and from the government if it gets overly oppressive.
People who are against guns. What does that mean? Hundreds of thousands die in car accidents but they aren't getting banned and they aren't even consititutionally protected.
Side note: bear means to carry - not own...but we've already lost that fight...for now
Ed
I am so god damn sick of the knee-jerk reactions from people any time "guns" come up. First, it does NOT ban all guns, just "assault weapons". You know, the kind that are designed for mass murder. If you say it's your right to have one for hunting, you're lying. There is scarcely any large, predatory game left in this country (you killed them all!) If you say you need it for defense, you're lying. The last time I checked, the war is over in Iraq. Besides, we only have the largest military force in the world. I don't need a gun crazy wack defending me, thanks. No, the only reason you want to have the "right" to own an "assault weapon" is because you secretly want to kill lots of people. Anyone who wants to own one of these should be institutionalized before they actually hurt someone.
Max
God bless America, I have never felt so concerned about the attitude of Americans until I read these outlandish comments.
Thanks for the entertainment.
Vet LEO and VFF
Mike
You Gun Freaks are a bunch of morons! Why don't we all shoot each other now and get it over with!
To Mike,
The only one who has mentioned shooting somebody is you, now who is the freak?
Look through the comments, only people saying ban them also say owner's want to kill other people. Maybe your projection of your own feelings on others are showing who you are really scared of, yourselves.
Vet LEO and VFF
To Ed,
"First, it does NOT ban all guns, just "assault weapons". You know, the kind that are designed for mass murder."
Educate yourself Ed, those weapons have not been used in VT or nearly any incidences of this type. That being said, according to your logic why ban them. DM is right about cars they kill 45,000 in the US each year, way more than guns. In fact, over 4.5 times the number for violent crime and guns. I don't hear your complaints about them, same logic. Fertilizer has killed more peopole in one incident than any firearm ever has in the US. Oh, and by the way Ed if anyone decides to assault you or your family wait for the military to handle it and see how that works. Not only will they never get their, laws would never allow it. I own a firearm and was "institutionalized" in the US Military, not a nut just a patriot that yourself rely upon to defend your freedom. Thanks for your disrespect!
Mercator
You mean VA, not VT.. VT is Vermont. You mention Cars as a parallel to Guns. Cars are designed for safe transportation, Guns for efficient killing. Efficient killing is effective defense, I understand this, however when and where do the limits begin to creep into this discussion. Cars were not invented when the constitution was created, regardless of this laws restricting there ownership were enacted. Our rights need change as technology develops. The constitution is meant to be flexible. I agree with our right to bear arms, but these are not the arms that were around when the constitution was written. Are there to be no limits? I think we should be able to own guns, but not without limits, and defining that line is always going to constantly change. It is up to the voting public. Such examples of legistlation do that.
Frank
Did anyone watch the Tucker Carlson interview with Carolyn McCarthy about the ban? When Tucker Carlson asked “do you know what a barrel shroud is" McCarthy replied "I actually don't know what a barrel shroud is. I believe it is a shoulder thing that goes up." WOW she might be one of the most ignorant people I have ever seen. You would think if she is going pass legislation that would drastically affect our nation and the second amendment that she would at least do her home work. I personally feel "more stupider" just by watching her. Whether you are pro gun or anti gun it is worth watching. And if you’re anti-gun you should feel proud that you have such great and knowledgeable representatives working for you. It is on you tube under Carolyn McCarthy.
RER
THE PRICE OF LIBERTY IS CONSTANT VIGILANCE. It always has been so and always will be so.
As has been stated before, it's not about gun control. It's about liberal control.
Larry
I think people who live in city's or suburbs who are ignorant of firearms, are now trying to make the rules. My family has been on farms for at least 7 generations that I can trace back. We learn to shoot as soon as we can hold a rifle. I think Carolyn knows little or nothing about firearms and even less about history. Is this something democrats do in order to look cool in their party? I think this bill has little or no chance to pass at all. Why introduce legislation that won't pass. It's a waste of money and time. What are we paying these people anyway? It's way too much that's for sure.
Vet LEO and VFF
Mercator you prove my point. You did not even bother to educate yourself about these comments before you made yours. We are talking about gun violence and originally in reference to Virginia Tech, VT not VA. Interesting point about automobiles, however, canons and muskettes were "weapons of assault" of their time, where are the laws you speak of banning them? Their are none! Their are limits in place and few would argue against criminals and the mentally unstable being prevented from ownership, however, I am neither and why should I be prevented from owning any type of gun when I do obey the law. Some drink and drive is that your fault? No legislation is being discussed to prevent the evil types from weapons, only those that obey these laws are affected.
Vet LEO and VFF
Mercator, by the way, you proved my point in another way. You defined guns as "for efficient killing", or over simplified to match your definition and perspective. While I would argue that guns are for hunting, sporting, defense, protection of freedom, weapons of our patriots, protection for our soldiers, accellerated salvation for our nation's enemies, tools for enforcing the laws and in some cases survival. A skill or tradition passed from father to son, father to son for generations and as much the fabric of this nation as the constitution that protects their very ownership. My Grandfather fought a war and defended this nation with his, as I have with mine and your freedom with both.
Joey
Vet LEO and VFF keep up the good work. We need more people like you to help squash this bill.
Ed
This is the first step toward a National Police State where only the military and police have guns, to have total control over the populace. I guess we have to look no further then England, where they've ban all types of guns, except certain double barrels, and the crooks are still getting handguns. Now they're considering a ban on butcher knives!!!
Gramps
The purpose of the 2d Ammendment is to ensure that ordinary citizens (the 'militia') have access to the same shoulder-fired, non-crew-served weapons as the military. Like the Swiss, who REQUIRE military veterans (trained adults) to keep a FULLY AUTOMATIC assault rifle and ammunition AT HOME, our Founding Fathers knew that an armed citizenry is the best defense against oppression, foreign or domestic.
If you're afraid of that responsibility, STOP supporting interference with those of us who aren't. If it weren't for us, you would already belong to the wolves.
Biff Ulysses
And they wonder why people utterly mistrust the government; and the politicians continue to play their little charade; and, (they hope), we the people will continue to grow more complacent as one after the other of our basic constitutional rights gets watered down or stripped away entirely. Why, oh why, are our politicians becoming less and less American? Why would they want to take firearms away from lawful, responsible citizens? What is it they wish to accomplish? There can be but one answer: eventual total and irreversible control over "the rabble." That is their ultimate purpose, for it certainly will not impact favorably against crime, and they know it. We have communists and anti-American ideologists in power, bent on totally redefining America, and on eradicating the memory of her as she was in decades and centuries past. It is truly disturbing.
John Howard
This bill amounts to treason on the part of it supporters.United States of America I think it'stime to bring these politions to justice and have them answer for there anti-American views!!!!
dave california
This bill is unsonstitutional. Assault weapons add no more increase to crime, think about it are you going to rob a seven eleven with a 16in rifle or a pistol. The fact is that less than 2% of all gun crime are commited with assault weapons. Plus guns prevent crime. A study showed in 2003 that when Washington DC banned pistols the murder rate increased while the national average decreased. If you were a criminal would you think twice about breaking into a house who's owner might have a gun. Having a gun make the unequaled equal.
Greg in Arizona
I am a registered Democrat. I am changing my affiliation to Republican. I want to thank Carolyn McCarthy for giving me enough notice (and I thought it was only Bill C.) And Dem leaders; pull your heads up out of the sand and try to see reality. If you make this happen, will you be available at a moments notice to protect us. (I think I hear crickets.)
What about this?
Why can't our scientists solve this problem? Can't we make these 'assault weapons' in such a way that they would not function in a restricted area? (geeze they do it with shopping carts!)Wouldn't this make everyone happy? (Don't worry about the criminal tampering because you won't stop criminals with laws anyway, but 99% of the nut cases you are worried about would not have the ability to defeat these systems)
C R
I have two sons both proud to serve their country, & the way things are going now, it makes them feel that what they done was all in vaine, how could our government allow this to happen, letting people come across our borders & not saying a thing to them, giving them jobs that our American citizens!! do taking food out of our children & grandchildren's mouth, our high society, upper level government have lost what little mind they posess, I have a friend who makes his living driving a truck across country delivering the very things that keep us going our food, clothing, gas for our vehicles, don't get me even started on that it is time for the Amerinan P eple to wake up & smell the coffe as it were & take back our country, & make us the Superpower we once were
ASSAULT?
What do we mean by assault? If we are talking in military terms then these weapons are insufficient and do not qualify. If we are talking anything you can assault someone with then your fist qualifies. But if we are talking about attacking the U.S. constitution then this is the mother of all assaults.
PL
Only two types of people use the term "Assault Weapon" in earnest.
Those who no very little to nothing about firearms functionality and or even less about existing firearms law and....Opportunistic Politicians.
It's amazing to listen to some of these people proudly flaunting their ignorance regarding guns and gun laws. And ironically, they have no interest at all in doing any research on the matter, to even try to find out the facts regarding why the issue of "Assaulte Weapons" is nothing but a cleverly crafted fraud.
Roger
I cannot believe that after all this time (clinton years,the first ban and how use