Attempted Semi-Autos Ban, Again! Senator Feinstein introduced Assault Weapons Ban of 2017. 125-page firearm prohibition is most far-reaching gun ban ever.

Feinstein: Attempted Semi-Autos Ban, Again!

By NRA-ILA:  Feinstein: Attempted Semi-Autos Ban, Again!  On Wednesday, Senator Dianne Feinstein introduced S. 2095, which she is calling the Assault Weapons Ban of 2017. The 125-page firearm prohibition fever dream is perhaps the most far-reaching gun ban ever introduced in Congress.

Subject to an exception for “grandfathered” firearms, the bill would prohibit AR-15s and dozens of other semi-automatic rifles by name (as well as their “variants” or “altered facsimiles”), and any semi-automatic rifle that could accept a detachable magazine and be equipped with a pistol grip, an adjustable or detachable stock, or a barrel shroud. And that’s just a partial list. “Pistol grip” would be defined as “a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip,” meaning the ban could implicate even traditional stocks or grips specifically designed to comply with existing state “assault weapon” laws.

Needless to say, semi-automatic shotguns and handguns would get similar treatment.

Feinstein at it Again!

Build a Custom Rifle!

6 thoughts on “Feinstein: Attempted Semi-Autos Ban, Again!

  1. Fuck off Feinstein
    A government that fears an armed citizenry is a government that needs to go. We are not sheep for the slaughter, nor slaves for the taking. We will not surrender. Molon Labe, til Valhalla

  2. If the liberals disarm the good guys, who will be armed? Right! The bad guys will be armed. Why do we keep electing such stupid people? These are people who don’t live where you and I do. . . . . People who have armed security that we pay for? Come-on folks, get rid of the establishment fools.

  3. I think her and Nancy Pelosi should both get out of politics and forget anything about guns and weaponry,of which they know nothing about.It isn’t the guns and the honest everyday man and woman that are doing the shootings. It is deranged idiots,that should be locked up. When someone commits a crime with a weapon they should be confined and not just slapped on the back of the wrist and told to not do that again.If it wasn’t for the ordinary people being armed,we might become subjects instead of free men and women.

  4. I’ll make ole Dianne a deal, if she get all the police to give up their AR-15s I will right after that. Bit not till they do it. The reason they need them is to defend themselves from criminals…….Hey, I need one for the same reasons. They don’t have them to defend me. The Supreme Court has even said it’s not their job so, that leave it up to me then. I federal judge in California years ago even said that too. It’s my job to defend myself and my family. I hate to tell the police but, they are no more important than me…..the fact is my life and the loves of my loved ones are more important to me. So Dianne, if you can simply convince every one of the police officer that they don’t need the same level of protection then call me some time. Really! http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html

  5. The police can only act once a crime has been committed and not before. They can act after you have been shot or stabbed which you hopefully survive. If you’re dead after the attack what will it matter to you if the perpetrators are imprisoned or not
    If you were armed and defended your self then it would matter to you and you could bare witness against the attackers and see them imprisoned.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *