Not while His Royal Orangeness is calling the shots. His base are the ones that own them, and his regime is propped up by the terrorist organization known as the National Rifle Association.
A Republican majority in the Senate will be the reason this doesn't happen. Mitch McConell will refuse to call Congress back to D.C. and bring the bill up for a vote. If you look in the dictionary under the word "obstruction," you'l see his disgusting face.
How are you gonna make it work? The so-called "Assault Weapons Ban" under Clinton didn't work.
You have to define what an "Assault Weapon" is ... then the manufacturers just change the product just enough so it doesn't fit the definition.
Then you also have the problem of manufacturers ramping up production before the law goes into effect. Because they are still able to sell products manufactured prior to the ban.
I once heard somebody propose the government outlaw every firearm design patented after 1900, as a simple solution. (But the Mannlicher semi-automatic rifle was designed in 1885.)
Thanks. I thought it was reinstated about 10 years ago. I've been saying for 10 years that they were outlawed. My goodness. I just read this though, which I thought made some good points. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/08/05/el-paso-shooting-dayton-gun-control-laws-should-not-be-weapons-bans/39317131/
Will a semi-auto weapon ban happen? It's always possible. To clarify, I say semi-auto ban instead of an assault rifle ban because a true assault weapon in a "fully automatic firearm. A machine gun if you will. However, you and I both know that a semiauto ban affects only the law-abiding citizen and will have no effect on violent crime as a whole, and the gun-grabbing politicians know this. So if the gun-grabbing politicians know that a gun ban affects only the law-abiding gun owner my question is...Why do they still want to ban semi-auto rifles? They know the criminal element will always be able to get whatever they need to do harm to anyone they choose. Do these politicians have an underlying agenda with the new round of gun bans? Just a thought.
Worked in Australia. No mass shootings in 20 years. It's not organized criminals that perpetrate atrocities, they always try to fly under the radar. It's wack jobs that should never be allowed within miles of any firearm heavier than a pea shooter. I don't know if it could work in the States, where the armed citizen is the norm rather than the exception.
Not gonna happen. Not in an election season...McConnell is too smart for that. They might be smart enough to get Trump to sign it but it is not getting to his desk.
A different type bill may pass but it will not be a semiautomatic ban. (Assault rifles are full auto not semi)
Disarming people only makes laa abiding citizens sitting ducks. As was shown with Australia's gun ban....their assaults increased while the USA and most of the rest of the worlds decreased at the same time.
I've already debunked this, but at the risk of repeating myself I'll do it again. The gun ban had little to no effect on assaults, where the rate had been increasing since long before. The vics weren't armed before that. Rather than manipulate the figures, look at the trend curve - the shape of it DIDN'T change.
20+ mass shootings a year? What was it like BEFORE that? The Port Arthur massacre that prompted a tightening of gun laws in Australia is no longer a world record, it's been surpassed twice. Guess where.
Thriftymaid 