Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Found this today, not good. Not sure if it was mentioned on here yet.

H.R.4269 - Assault Weapons Ban of 2015
114th Congress (2015-2016)

Sponsor: Rep. Cicilline, David N. [D-RI-1] (Introduced 12/16/2015)
Committees: House - Judiciary
Latest Action: 12/16/2015 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-con ... /4269/text

Write your reps.

It does say this:

“(v) (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a semiautomatic assault weapon.

Looks like it you own one before its passed, then you are grandfathered in:

“(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession, sale, or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of enactment of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2015.

So does that sound like if you own one before it can still be held and transferred?

Some notes I have from the bill's text:

- "To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes."

- "Semiautomatic assault weapon" is a term defined on a whim by politicians that feature characteristics to make shooting more comfortable, like a pistol grip, telescopic stock, or barrel shroud so you don't burn your hands and has nothing to do with the lethality of the bullet that gets fired from those guns compared the same gun without those features.

- Most .22 plinking rifles will now be "semiautomatic assault weapons" and therefore banned. What a joke.

- Any pistol that has a detachable magazine and a threaded barrel will now be considered a "semiautomatic assault weapon." ::sigh::

- Most semiautomatic shotguns in production today would be considered "semiautomatic assault weapons" under this legislation. Do we have a semiautomatic shotgun problem that I wasn't aware of?

- In addition to the AK and AR rifles (the most popular rifles in this country) being banned, this legislation would also ban some rifles that shoot pistol caliber cartridges (Kel-Tec Sub2000 for example). So if I have a pistol that shoots bullets that's fine, but if I have a rifle that shoots the same pistol bullets I'm not fine? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

- AK and AR pistols would be banned as well.

- "If any provision of this Act, an amendment made by this Act, or the application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby." So if a court rules that this act can't ban AR rifles for example, only that specific part of the law gets wiped away but the rest of the bill stays intact.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

ShotgunBlast .. I agree this is a bad ban and a bad idea, but current owners will be grandfathered in... from the way I am looking at it.

Towards the top of it it says “(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession, sale, or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of enactment of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2015."


It also has a large list of excluded items, like the ruger 10/22 is in the excluded list.

Either way this is not good, write your reps.

124 Democrats on that bill... not one Republican. Why does that not surprise me.

And the whole bill title... "To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes." Last time I checked, the Constitution said "Shall NOT be infringed... as the founders intended it to be unlimited and unrestricted.

The whole thing, down to the title, violates Constitutional law.

The House Committee on the Judiciary is split 22 R's, 16 D's. If it runs party lines... it will never make it out of committee. Trey Gowdy is on the Sub-Committee that will review it first. I doubt this will go anywhere, but bet you bottom buck, I'm contacting my rep.

They want to outlaw Slide-fire stocks and things like it...

Any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.

Can someone tell me how many grenade launchers and slide fire stocks have been used in crimes?

I just sent this message to my Rep.

Gerald E. Connolly,
I am writing you today to voice my opposition to “H.R.4269 - Assault Weapons Ban of 2015”. The official title as introduced is “To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purpose”.

This entire Bill, including the title, violates Constitutional law and the very premise of the Second Amendment. The Constitution (being the supreme law of the land) and the Second Amendment specifically says the people’s right “shall not be infringed”… as in not at all.

When the founding fathers wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they were afraid to create a standing army controlled by the federal government because they feared the Government would one day become tyrannical and use the army against the people. In his writings from that time, James Madison said "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country." If you read James Madison's Federalist Paper Number 46, you will see that the expectation of our founders was for the free people to have arms equal to that of the standing army, the people be well trained, and grossly outnumber the standing army, in the event that the people need to take their government back by force from tyrannical leaders. The free people, their access to arms and training was never meant to be limited at all... but rather the power of the Government was meant to be limited by the Constitution.

Also, the fact that more than half of the American people is a very obvious deterrence, preventing our enemies from attempting a full-blown domestic assault in the continental US. Disarming the people, making these weapons more difficult or impossible to get will grossly limit the people’s ability to defend ourselves against our enemies. Seeing as how we are starting to see ISIS and ISIS sympathizers launch small, focused attacks here is the US, this is not the time to take weapons that are safer and easier to control, away from the people.

To make things worse, 100% of every aspect of the features which determine what weapons should be banned are either safety features, features to allow the use of safety accessors, cosmetic, or do absolutely nothing to affect the lethality of a bullet fired from the weapon. Also, all this does is disarm honest, law abiding citizens. Criminals, by definition, ignore the law and do whatever they want, with no concern for consequences. Drugs such as Cocaine, Marijuana, and Opium are 100% outlawed in the US, yet the government can stop bad people from bringing hundreds of metric tons a month of illegal drugs into the US. How can we be expected to believe the Government can protect the people by keep illegal arms and people out of the US, out of the hands of criminals?

In addition, per FBI reports from 2014, the weapons that this bill would ban are responsible for less than 1% of all murders in the US. Yet, the popularity of these types of weapon is so overwhelming, that AR-15/M4 clones are the number one selling firearm in the US. Not only does this bill violate the Constitution, it will have almost no impact on murder if it actually worked, which history tells us prohibition doesn’t.

Another issue to consider beyond the self-defense and the fact that criminals will ignore it, is the economic impact. There are several million weapons a year sold… accessories, ammunition, training, etc., which will all go away. Millions of people will be out of work and $2.7 billion annually will be lost from the economy.

I hope I can count on you to side with the people, with freedom, and to stand against the illegal and tyrannical actions imposed by this Bill.

Thank you,
Marc Spaziano

Marc,

Great letter, I will send this one on as well.
Are you sending it to Trey Gowdy also? My rep is Gerald also, and the last several times I wrote him about opposing any new gun control and or bans he sent back a pretty stupid canned response that he has and that was it so I dont think we will get anything out of him. The best thing we can do is send a bunch of emails and letters and maybe he will see this is a bad idea.

I didn't... but that is a great idea!

I don't care about being "grandfathered in"...

I'm more concerned about those coming AFTER me! What about their choices?

Yeah, I'm gonna lose my effin' mind before this election cycle is completed.

Reverenddel wrote:I don't care about being "grandfathered in"...

I'm more concerned about those coming AFTER me! What about their choices?

Yeah, I'm gonna lose my effin' mind before this election cycle is completed.

Besides future generations if this were to pass it would be one more step, one more chip away at the 2nd amendment. When they claim grandfathered guns are the problem since nothing changed with the ban they will talk about "buy backs" or outright confiscation. The gun control side is never satisfied.

MarcSpaz wrote: "Letter"

Unfortunately sending it to Gerald E. Connolly, will get nowhere except the trashcan.

Send your letters here, it will cover all your congressional district representatives

https://www.opencongress.org/bill/hr4269-114/show

I was reading this article and one line stands out as 100% false
https://www.rt.com/usa/327614-obama-gun ... ive-order/

"Federal law currently requires that all licensed gun dealers conduct background checks. However, this rule does not apply to firearms sold online or at gun shows."

Really? please clarify..

I was reading this article and one line stands out as 100% false
https://www.rt.com/usa/327614-obama-gun ... ive-order/

"Federal law currently requires that all licensed gun dealers conduct background checks. However, this rule does not apply to firearms sold online or at gun shows."

This is where the media gets it's false information
http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safet ... s-map.html