# Feinstein Proposing Specifics: New Gun Control Bill **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 27, 2012, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298 "2012-12-27T17:26:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/1 "2012-12-27T17:26:19Z")
The drudge report is linking to Nancy Pelosi’s web page, which has a specific proposal for gun control. [Pelosi’s Senate Web Site](http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons) I haven’t seen anything on the board yet, so we can use this thread to discuss the merits of the legislation. As a law abiding gun owner, I’m opposed to this law. She is basically taking the 1994 Assault Weapons Bill and making it much worse. Instead of just rifles, handguns are now included. Instead of two “scary” features, only one is needed. There is also a registration element. The ten round magazine rule for handguns is extremely out of touch. Many handguns are large capacity now, including one of mine. This law appears to force gun owners such as myself to either get rid of our firearm or submit to registration with a picture, fingerprints and ID. But even worse is the notion of specifically listing which guns, by name, can be allowed and can not. There are 120 on the “naughty” list and 900 on the “nice” list. Granting this sort of gun by gun control is a very bad idea. You’re going to have firearms manufacturers needing to argue the merits of individual guns. The fact that the “good” weapons that are “used for hunting or sporting purposes” need to be listed by name as the proposal states is proof that the legislation doesn’t make sense. If there was any rhyme or reason to the proposal it would have measurable criteria rather than needing to list by model. So it looks like more of the same from the gun banning crowd. AWB II, the sequel. ---
**Author:** ![artemis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/91b2a8/32.png) [@artemis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/artemis)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/2 "2012-12-27T17:33:51Z")
Well, that’s a total non-starter. Why am I not surprised? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/3 "2012-12-27T17:35:38Z")
> [@](#): > > So it looks like more of the same from the gun banning crowd. AWB II, the sequel. Yeah, just skimmed it so far, but seems equally idiotic and arbitrary…and probably have an equally dismal effect on preventing actual gun crime (the link further down the page that claims a ‘6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders’ is laughable. The way things are going, though, don’t be surprised if this horseshit doesn’t go through and get implemented. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/4 "2012-12-27T17:54:00Z")
Here are some specifics that Pelosi is suggesting… > [@](#): > > Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of: > 120 specifically-named firearms > Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic > Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds As already stated, banning specifically named firearms is an indicator that the logic being used to determine legality is faulty. The 10 round rule is going to criminalize a lot of existing firearms. Most models of 9MM .40 and other handguns come in larger than ten. Usually it’s only the “MA compliant” ones that have ten or less. > [@](#): > > Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by: > Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test > Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test > Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans This one requires some reading around the lines. The 94 AWB required two of the five characteristics: [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban) > [@](#): > > Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following: > Folding or telescoping stock > Pistol grip > Bayonet mount > Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one > Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device that enables launching or firing rifle grenades, though this applies only to muzzle mounted grenade launchers and not those mounted externally). So it seems that the new list is the above, minus bayonet mounts and flash suppressors. But since the criteria is only one instead of two items ANY gun with a folding or telescoping stock, pistol grip, or flash suppressor is banned. This would seem to include youth model rifles and shotguns, since they often have a telescoping stock to accommodate younger and growing shooters. Banning pistol grips includes most, if not all, home defense shotguns. > [@](#): > > Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include: > Background check of owner and any transferee; > Type and serial number of the firearm; > Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint; > Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and > Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration Am I reading this right? If I want to keep my weapon I need to fill out paperwork. What about the millions of gun owners who don’t do it? What’s the penalty for these people who are resistant to the idea, or who are lazy, or who just don’t know about it? What will the penalties be for this new class of criminals we create with this law? I’m guessing it will be millions if not tens of millions of people. Enforcing this would be similar in scope to the drug war. It’s a good time to be a ATF agent. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/5 "2012-12-27T17:56:59Z")
Correction to the OP: The original AWB did include handguns. But looking at the criteria it was only small numbers of rare ones. This new proposal would include most modern handguns so it’s still a considerable step up from the original law. ---
**Author:** ![babygoat666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2acd7d/32.png) [@babygoat666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/babygoat666)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/6 "2012-12-27T17:57:03Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > It’s a good time to be a ATF agent. This is sarcasm, no? ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/7 "2012-12-27T17:59:11Z")
One humorous, and telling, line from the proposal: “Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:” “Legitimate hunters”. Like “Legitimate Rape”, this tells us a lot about the viewpoint of the speaker. ---
**Author:** ![artemis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/91b2a8/32.png) [@artemis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/artemis)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/8 "2012-12-27T17:59:54Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Correction to the OP: The original AWB did include handguns. But looking at the criteria it was only small numbers of rare ones. This new proposal would include most modern handguns so it’s still a considerable step up from the original law. Actually I’m not sure it does. The bill seems to refer specifically to “fixed magazines” which most handguns don’t have. Every pistol I’ve seen has a detachable magazine, so I think all this might require is swapping out large magazines in favor of 110-round magazines in order to keep the pistol legal. But I’m not completely sure - it’s confusingly worded. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/9 "2012-12-27T18:00:24Z")
> [@babygoat666](#): > > This is sarcasm, no? My meaning is that business for them will be booming. They’ll need to quadruple in size. If this thing passes, they won’t have to worry about layoffs for a few decades. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/10 "2012-12-27T18:06:44Z")
> [@artemis](#): > > Actually I’m not sure it does. The bill seems to refer specifically to “fixed magazines” which most handguns don’t have. Every pistol I’ve seen has a detachable magazine, so I think all this might require is swapping out large magazines in favor of 110-round magazines in order to keep the pistol legal. But I’m not completely sure - it’s confusingly worded. You might be right about that. But yes, it’s so poorly worded there’s no way to know for sure. When in doubt I’m going to assume the worst, given that we’re dealing with a Pelosi proposal here. Any idea what the hell this means: > [@](#): > > Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds. Also, for those wondering what a “bullet button” is: > [@](#): > > Other states allow people to use their finger to pop out the magazine and quickly reload. It’s called a detachable magazine, and in California, its use in combination with other features such as a telescoping stock or pistol grip is illegal. > > The intent is to slow down the process of reloading the weapon. But many target shooters don’t like the reloading hassle. “For me to use this on the range, I would have to open up the receiver and top load it,” said Normandy. > > To get around this, gun manufacturers are selling firearms to Californians with what is called a “bullet button.” > > The user uses the tip of a bullet to release the empty magazine and pop in a new one. The button doesn’t work with one’s finger, so the magazine is considered “fixed.” [Local CBS](http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/05/01/bullet-button-used-to-get-around-california-gun-laws/) ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/11 "2012-12-27T18:08:46Z")
That was actually from Diane Feinstein’s page and its her proposal. I’ll find a link to her presser where she also wants to re-categorize ALL semi auto guns as Title II weapons making them fall under NFA regs. All of those here and elsewhere crying ofr a ban should be excited that this legislation will at least be CALLED an “assault weapon” ban, even though it won take anything away from anybody. ---
**Author:** ![babygoat666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2acd7d/32.png) [@babygoat666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/babygoat666)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/12 "2012-12-27T18:10:29Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > My meaning is that business for them will be booming. They’ll need to quadruple in size. If this thing passes, they won’t have to worry about layoffs for a few decades. Yeah but they would have to worry about the people who are literally up in arms about it. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/13 "2012-12-27T18:14:31Z")
Yes, this sounds like a warmed over version of the AWB, which - thanks to reasonable pro-gun folks like **XT** and **Zeriel** - I came to understand was a waste of time. However, unless you have a better idea, I don’t think you can complain much if it gets passed. The national mood is clearly Something Must Be Done, and if you don’t do it then somebody like Pelosi will. > [@Debaser](#): > > “Legitimate hunters”. Like “Legitimate Rape”, this tells us a lot about the viewpoint of the speaker. Well, not really. Rape is rape, but hunting _people_ would still be hunting. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/14 "2012-12-27T18:18:14Z")
> [@JXJohns](#): > > That was actually from Diane Feinstein’s page and its her proposal. D’oh! Mods, can you lend a hand and change the thread title so as to not cause confusion. ---
**Author:** ![babygoat666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2acd7d/32.png) [@babygoat666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/babygoat666)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/15 "2012-12-27T18:18:27Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > The ten round magazine rule for handguns is extremely out of touch. Many handguns are large capacity now, including one of mine. Isn’t that the point? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/16 "2012-12-27T18:18:58Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > D’oh! Mods, can you lend a hand and change the thread title so as to not cause confusion. Done. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/17 "2012-12-27T18:19:24Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > The ten round magazine rule for handguns is extremely out of touch. Many handguns are large capacity now, including one of mine. This law appears to force gun owners such as myself to either get rid of our firearm or submit to registration with a picture, fingerprints and ID. And once again, none of this would have prevented the Newtown massacre as it appears those guns were purchased legally and basically stolen. Having the legitimate owner go through all this does nothing when the weapons are then stolen. Plus, even a novice can change a semi-auto mag in about 3 seconds. So showing up at your intended place of carnage with a 10 rounder in the weapon and 2 more 10 rounders in your pocket, instead of one 30 round magazine, will not not prevent anything, it will only add about 6 seconds to the total assault time.:rolleyes: I’ve posted it before and I’ll continue to do so: if we wake up tomorrow and every single firearm has vanished into thin air and from then on we were only allowed to own single round muskets from 1776, the minute someone murdered somebody else with one (and in a country of 300+ million that would happen sooner than later) the antis would be screaming to ban the Muskets. Don’t budge a single inch! ---
**Author:** ![babygoat666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2acd7d/32.png) [@babygoat666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/babygoat666)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/18 "2012-12-27T18:24:05Z")
BTW I’m not necessarily in favor of gun control. But as a non-gun-owner, the 10 round limit sounds extremely reasonable. Can anyone share a scenario where having more than 10 rounds would be useful apart from a shooting spree? I’m not trying to be an asshole, I seriously just don’t understand. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/19 "2012-12-27T18:29:17Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > And once again, none of this would have prevented the Newtown massacre as it appears those guns were purchased legally and basically stolen. Having the legitimate owner go through all this does nothing when the weapons are then stolen. > > Plus, even a novice can change a semi-auto mag in about 3 seconds. So showing up at your intended place of carnage with a 10 rounder in the weapon and 2 more 10 rounders in your pocket, instead of one 30 round magazine, will not not prevent anything, it will only add about 6 seconds to the total assault time.:rolleyes: > I’ve posted it before and I’ll continue to do so: if we wake up tomorrow and every single firearm has vanished into thin air and from then on we were only allowed to own single round muskets from 1776, the minute someone murdered somebody else with one (and in a country of 300+ million that would happen sooner than later) the antis would be screaming to ban the Muskets. > > Don’t budge a single inch! You don’t think stopping for three seconds with your head down to change a magazine can change the flow of a spree-shooting? [2011 Tucson shooting - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting) ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298/20 "2012-12-27T18:30:26Z")
> [@babygoat666](#): > > BTW I’m not necessarily in favor of gun control. But as a non-gun-owner, the 10 round limit sounds extremely reasonable. Can anyone share a scenario where having more than 10 rounds would be useful apart from a shooting spree? I’m not trying to be an asshole, I seriously just don’t understand. Sure it sounds reasonable, but so does 12, 6, or 13. The point is that 10 rounds doesn’t make a gun any “safer” than 12. Reloads are trivial and as RNATB stated earlier, this move is solely to make it look like the Feds are doing SOMETHING while they are actually doing NOTHING. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feinstein-proposing-specifics-new-gun-control-bill/645298.md?page=2)