Read the Beforeitsnews.com story here. Advertise at Before It's News here.
Profile image
By Reaper (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views
Now:
Last hour:
Last 24 hours:
Total:

Democrats Targeting Much More Than AR-15s In "Assault Weapons Ban" Bill - They Want All Your Guns

% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.



Yep, they want your hunting guns too, despite claims otherwise.  Oh, and they want your pistols, as well, despite claims otherwise.

  • We all know the Communist Democrats want a full ban on guns for the citizenrydespite their claims otherwise.  Yep, they want your hunting guns too, despite claims otherwise.  Oh, and they want your pistols, as well, despite claims otherwise.

How can I say such a thing?  Well, let me remind you of the words that came out of Senator Dianne Feinstein’s own mouth in 1995.

 

 

She still hasn’t changed her position despite the fact that she has admitted that no piece of legislation will stop mass shootings.

 

 

However, new legislation being put forward by Democrat Representatives David N. Cicilline (RI) and  Frederica S. Wilson are simply following in the footsteps of Feinstein’s attempted gun ban in 2013 following the Sandy Hook incident.  Feinstein not only went after handguns and shotguns, but she also wanted gun owners’ fingerprints too.  Thankfully, that piece of unconstitutional garbage was defeated.

Now, we’ve got Cicilline and Wilson attempting to do something similar with HR 5087 and HR 5077, which are virtually the same “Assault Weapons Ban of 2018″ bill.

“Assault weapons were made for one purpose,” a statement released by Cicilline said. “They are designed to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time. They do not belong in our communities.”

Nonsense!  That is not their design.

Both bills seek to ultimately rid Americans of their firearms, including hunting shotguns and semi-automatic handguns.  In fact, the bills seek to ban all semi-automatic shotguns, pistols and rifles, anything that “requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge,” and “utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round.”

All AR and AK platforms of rifles are included, as well as Thompson rifles.  These people even took the time to write out long lists of specific weapons that are to be banned.  Read those lists here and here.

The only exemptions, according to the legislation are:

  • “(A) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;
  • “(B) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or
  • “(C) is an antique firearm, as defined in section 921 of this title.

Additionally, if an FFL dealer receives a grandfathered banned weapon, they must notify law enforcement.

They also seek to target high capacity magazines.

The sole purpose of the bills is to classify nearly EVERY form of semi-automatic firearm as an “assault weapon” solely for the purposes of banning the sale, manufacture, transfer, and distribution.

“How some models or features made the cut and others didn’t is a mystery to anyone with the most elementary knowledge of firearms technology,” said the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action.  “Clearly, however, two of America’s most popular defensive firearms – the AR-15 and the Glock 17 – would be prohibited under the Act. The former is banned by name (“[a]ll AR types”) and the latter as a “semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm” (i.e., the Glock 18). That alone puts the bill at odds with existing Supreme Court precedent, which makes clear the Second Amendment protects the sorts of firearms in common use for lawful purposes. ”

It’s not just that, but the legislation also actually bans shotguns with a rocket launcher on them!  Has anyone ever heard of that?  I mean, it sounds pretty cool, doesn’t it?  However, I’ve never heard of such a thing.  And yes, I think rocket launchers should be protected under the Second Amendment.

All of this is unconstitutional as Congress has been given no authority to engage in such bans or restrictions under the people’s protection of the Second Amendment.

While HR 5077 only has one co-sponsor, HR 5087 has 175, all Democrats.

As of last month, both bills were referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations where they will more than likely die a quiet death, as they should.

However, according to Media Trackers, Democrats in the House,

…hope they can force a floor vote on their bill through the use of what’s called a “Discharge Petition.” In such a case, if backers can get 218 members to sign the petition they can force a piece of legislation out of committee and directly to the House floor.

The last time this occurred was not too long ago.  In 2015, the Export-Import Bank billwas put to a vote on the House Floor out of committee through the used of a discharge petition.

Of course, this is just in the House.  Senator Feinstein put forth her own “assault weapons ban” bill, S 2095.  She has 29 co-sponsors for it, all Democrats.

Her bill mirrors the House versions.

Gun Owners of America referred to the bills as  “trojan horses.”

“Make no mistake, these bills are far nastier than the Clinton-Feinstein gun ban ever was,” Wrote GOA.  “Rather than requiring two irrelevant cosmetic features in order to ban a gun (as Clinton-Feinstein did), the Feinstein-Cicilline bills would require only one, thereby affecting tens of millions of semi-automatic rifles and handguns.”

“Sure, you can keep the guns and magazines you already have them — for now, at least,” GOA adds.  “But you have to keep them locked up, and private transfers would be outlawed by the legislation — unless you transfer them using a background registration check.  In fact, the bill makes no provisions for what happens to your guns if you die. And it’s far from clear whether you can pass them on to your kids — particularly if, for instance, your executor is one of the 257,000 military veterans who were unconstitutionally put into the NICS system.”

President Donald Trump, who supported the Clinton-Feinstein gun ban and who promised NRA members that the attack on the Second Amendment was over because they had a friend in the White House has spit on the Constitution he swore to uphold and said, “We can [ban bump stocks] with an executive order. I’m going to write the bump stock; essentially, write it out. So you won’t have to worry about bump stock. Shortly, that will be gone. We can focus on other things.”

I ask, by what constitutional authority are you doing this Mr. President?  You have none.  You are no better than the usurper before you in usurping authority to ban bump stocks.  That’s not a part of your job, sir.  Nor is it a part of the authority of Congress, and don’t think it doesn’t set precedence for the next person that occupies the White House.

GOA warns, “If President Trump can ban bump stocks without statutory authority, then a future president can ban anything without statutory authority… Banning something which helps a shooter “accelerate” a gun’s rate of fire can then be used by a future anti-gun Democrat President to ban polished bolts, match triggers, magazines, tripods, and perhaps even AR-15′s themselves — if they have pistol grips which allow them to be fired faster and more accurately.”

Listen to Executive Director of GOA, Erich Pratt as he explains the issue.

 

 

Friends, it really is time that we stopped playing defense with these Communists and listening to the whining of children like David Hogg and start going on the offensive like Senate candidate Austin Petersen and start looking to repeal unconstitutional gun laws and re-establishing the Second Amendment as our forefathers intended, not compromising because an emotional mob believes we are a democracy.



Before It’s News® is a community of individuals who report on what’s going on around them, from all around the world.

Anyone can join.
Anyone can contribute.
Anyone can become informed about their world.

"United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.

Please Help Support BeforeitsNews by trying our Natural Health Products below!


Order by Phone at 888-809-8385 or online at https://mitocopper.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST

Order by Phone at 866-388-7003 or online at https://www.herbanomic.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST

Order by Phone at 866-388-7003 or online at https://www.herbanomics.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST


Humic & Fulvic Trace Minerals Complex - Nature's most important supplement! Vivid Dreams again!

HNEX HydroNano EXtracellular Water - Improve immune system health and reduce inflammation.

Ultimate Clinical Potency Curcumin - Natural pain relief, reduce inflammation and so much more.

MitoCopper - Bioavailable Copper destroys pathogens and gives you more energy. (See Blood Video)

Oxy Powder - Natural Colon Cleanser!  Cleans out toxic buildup with oxygen!

Nascent Iodine - Promotes detoxification, mental focus and thyroid health.

Smart Meter Cover -  Reduces Smart Meter radiation by 96%! (See Video).

Report abuse

    Comments

    Your Comments
    Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

    Total 6 comments
    • Jerry

      Pass this around and wake people up:

      The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities. ~ See Related Article
       

      The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army.
      The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.
      The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
      The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.
      The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion).
      These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.
      Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, “the Organized Militia (the National Guard) can not be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States.”
      The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.
      During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada.
      The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.
      The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states.
      Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.
      Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states:
      “The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States.” In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, “that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it.”
      “This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose.
      Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power.”
      The Honorable William Gordon
      Congressional Record, House, Page 640 – 1917

    • Anonymous

      No smack, that is how the nasty a$$+

      • Anonymous

        jews roll.

    • Man

      This is such a slippery slope Law when banning AR-15! who knows where it ends!

      Look at gay marriage! It started with the gays marrying and Now We have Pedofile priets marrying their catholic boys and Females marrying their hung animals!

      • Man

        But seriously, Look at the next 2 Countries with High gun ownership. Switsersland and Finland. They have better Guncontrol than the US….

    • Ideas Time

      Every act of every government officer, state or federal, must be authorized by at least one provision of the Constitution; see Finley v. United States, 490 U.S. 545, 109 S.Ct. 2003, 104 L.Ed.2d 593 (1989); Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Co., 486 U.S. 800, 818, 108 S.Ct. 2166, 2179, 100 L.Ed.2d 811 (1988); Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Risjord, 449 U.S. 368, 379-380, 101 S.Ct. 669, 676-677, 66 L.Ed.2d 571 (1981); Kline v. Burke Construction Co., 260 U.S. 226, 233-234, 43 S.Ct. 79, 82-83, 67 L.Ed. 226 (1922); Case of th [sic] Sewing Machine Companies, 18 Wall. 553, 577-578, 586-587, 21 L.Ed. 914 (1874); Sheldon v. Sill, 8 How. 441, 449, 12 L.Ed. 1147 (1850); Cary v. Curtis, 3 How. 236, 245, 11 L.Ed. 576 (1845); McIntire v. Wood, 7 Cranch 504, 506, 3 L.Ed. 420 (1813).

    MOST RECENT
    Load more ...

    SignUp

    Login

    Newsletter

    Email this story
    Email this story

    If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

    If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.