New assault weapons ban introduced

  • Article by: RICHARD SIMON , Los Angeles Times
  • Updated: January 24, 2013 - 9:28 PM

National Rifle Association assailed proposed prohibition on 150 weapons and move to curtail capacity in ammunition magazines.

  • 41
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
johndontJan. 25, 1312:07 AM

I hope you anti-gun Democrats are paying attention. instead of coming up with a sensible bill that might have a chance of getting somewhere, Feinstein introduces a bill stomping all over law abiding gun owners which has absolutely zero chance of going nowhere. All so she can get attention and make you think she's doing something productive.

In other words, She thinks her Democrat constituents are as dumb as a bag of hammers.

13
8
johndontJan. 25, 13 1:42 AM

As did Obama, Feinstein took an oath to uphold the Constitution.

11
5
comment229Jan. 25, 13 5:02 AM

If there were 10 assault weapons out there in the world, that we could find, confiscate, and then eliminate, I would be all in favor of this. But essentially, this is closing the barn door after the cows got out. I am opposed to these weapons (and yes, I own guns and am a hunter), but what is being proposed is useless and detracts from what the REAL issue should be; and that is school security which is not even on the back burner anymore. So, go back to arguing about the assault weapons ban, until the next school attack happens (almost was another tragedy last week) and then it is going to be too late. The simplest thing that could be done, is simply replacing the classroom doors with secure doors with dead bolts and eliminating the glass beside the classroom openings. I bet every teacher in America would welcome the ability to close that door and turn a key in that dead bolt lock from the inside, to lock down the classroom until help arrived. There... go back to discussing weapons now.

7
8
fatgaryJan. 25, 13 5:54 AM

"I don't think people really understand the firepower that's out there on the streets," ..you mean the criminals...and yes we do understand, that's why we, the law abiding citizens, own the same guns, to protect our families. This is all political grandstanding. These bans and restrictions will not solve anything......

12
7
paulusJan. 25, 13 6:06 AM

Sorry Di-Fi, we don't believe you that you will stop with these measures. I've heard the interviews where you stated you wanted to have an outright ban picking up every one of them, but you didn't have 51 votes. I know you have your conceal and carry, but you want to restrict other people's rights to protect themselves. What a typical liberal hypocrite you are. If you think Feinstein and the rest of the libs will stop here, take a look at what the Democrats in New York actually wanted in the law they just passed. Confiscation of assault weapons, confiscation of ten round clips, continue to allow pistol permit holder's information to be public, label semi-automatic shotguns with more than 5 rounds or pistol grips as "assault weapons", limit magazines to 5 rounds and conficate banned magazines, micro-stamping of all guns in New York State, mandatory locking of guns at home, and others. Luckily someone leaked this information so we know confiscation is part of the ultimate plan. I really hope this goes to a vote in the Senate so we can watch Klobuchar and Franken vote for this, although Franken might vote no in order to get re-elected. More liberal hypocrisy, but we have come to expect no less from left.

9
7
eclectic51Jan. 25, 13 7:02 AM

johndont - 'As did Obama, Feinstein took an oath to uphold the Constitution'..... Haven't you heard that the US Supreme court has ruled that the constitution does NOT eliminate the right to modify what type of guns and ammo are legal. I have yet to hear a reasonable argument for why anyone, besides military personnel, need assault weapons with high capacity clips. I don't consider the crazies that claim we need these guns to protect ourselves from our own government reasonable. I don't know any deer hunters that say they need these weapons. I think Feinstein is brave to go so bold. Reid would just waffle to the NRA.

5
10
tomstromieJan. 25, 13 7:07 AM

"I don't know any deer hunters that say they need these weapons."

The Constitution is not about deer hunting.

12
3
fatgaryJan. 25, 13 7:09 AM

comment229...you're a hunter, then guessing you have an semi-auto rifle or as they are now called "assault weapons"...as for the "second tragedy".. "One man bumped into another man. That was the catalyst for an argument that erupted into gunfire at a Lone Star College campus" if this didn't happen on school grounds, we would of never heard about it.. and now just reported, 2nd suspect just arrested in Plano...

2
3
guessagainJan. 25, 13 7:10 AM

I would suspect that more innocent people have been killed (both intentionally or accidentally) by these semi-automatic assault weapons than have been saved by their use. No one needs a 30-round clip in a semiautomatic to protect his family. Can anyone show where the use of these guns by private citizens been necessary and actually succeeded?

4
5
guessagainJan. 25, 13 7:13 AM

johndont: "As did Obama, Feinstein took an oath to uphold the Constitution." Please explain how providing regulations of the use and ownership of certain firearms is against the "well-regulated militia" clause of the Second Amendment. Sound like that's exactly what the Amendment calls for.

5
6

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT