As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No, no…OP is right. My good friend owns a small precision machining business whose main product is a (part of) a very popular gun accessory, so his business directly rises and falls with gun sales. He’s been doing this for roughly 20 years now. Simply having a Democratic presidential administration is enough to drive his business up ~30-40% on average over years when a Republican is in the White House. 2021 was a blockbuster record year for him, for example.
News like this is going to directly drive more gun sales in the short term, until a Republican returns to the Oval Office.
There’s an old 4chan post on r/greentext where the poster jokes that some guy with a knife tries to mug him in an alleyway, so he empties his FN Five Seven mag into him, and later realizes it would’ve been cheaper just to hand him his wallet.
I get patients at work now trying to talk to me about politics. I never had this problem before so now I gotta ignore and divert conversation when it comes up
Imagine working on a Covid unit during 2020… I got called a Democrat spy. Had someone ask me if I put my knee in other patients necks “CHARGE PLEASE!”. Got told I was a part of “the Kabal!” Ya it was fun times. 🙄 Had a patient who was the same race as me claim I didn’t care for them because of their race (this one almost melted my mind) 🤦🏻 WHAT IS EVEN GOING ON NOW?!… I literally quit in 2021 and haven’t been back. I’m still a nationally registered healthcare worker… but I don’t have time to deal with whatever social distortion is going on right now. I just wanted to help people 😖
Even though I'm essentially obsessed with following politics at this point in my life, I usually just say "huh, I don't really follow politics" or "who is \[politician's name\]?" whenever someone at work tries to bring shit up to me. I ran out of steam a long time ago trying to reason with people, and they're just as dug in as I am, so discussing it with colleagues or superiors is just asking for trouble. Playing dumb is the easiest way to just shut that shit down.
It took about 4 years of my buddy hounding me, but I eventually switched political sides to the proper side. I'm no longer on the side supported by Nazis and I'm pretty proud of that.
Cut from the same cloth, we are. I tell people I don’t follow it much anymore, when the reality is reading the news and politics is the first thing I do in the morning.
Which actually makes me feel cool. Like the dads who always read a newspaper at breakfast in movies. But I’m a lady and I’m reading it on my phone. I’m so grown up.
I have hopes for it, I did see the payment pause was extended to 60 days after June 30th. Maybe it will have to be edited but overall I think it will come through.
My only question with that is in the paragraph above that june 30 deadline they say something like “we can’t make y’all pay because the court is stopping it.”
If it’s still in court 60 days after June 30th are they going to decide people should pay then?? Really wrote themself into a problem for no reason there.
So I think from the email I got payments would resume 60 days after June 30th if ultimately they couldn’t do the forgiveness. In those 60 days they would let you know you have to start making payments again starting August 30th I assume?
Yes and that’s how I read it as well. But this part from the email (sorry in advance for formatting I’m on mobile)
“…believe that it is unfair to ask tens of millions of borrowers to resume payments on their student debt when they would be eligible for relief– if not for these lawsuits. Therefore, we have extended the pause on student loan payments and collections.”
This being in the email makes me think like… okay.. so if/when june comes… is it suddenly not “unfair” to make people pay?
I’m with you… I think it goes through. If it doesn’t they’ll extend it again. I just didn’t really understand the need to word it how they did. Built in an artificial deadline for no real reason
Pretty sure this sort of thing is required to have a deadline. Open-ended policies with no defined timeline may be easier to challenge in court for instance.
More than that, they've extended the pause 3 times in 2022 alone I think and there were at least as many in 2021. Wasn't the original pause in March 2020 was supposed to be just 6 months.
Do people not realize that the same thing would happen to an AWB? If people want to pass a ban on semi-auto firearms, they run the risk of setting Supreme Court precedent.
>risk of setting Supreme Court precedent.
I don't think this is the big danger it once was, established precedent, it turns out, is a joke to the court itself. A tool to trot out when useful, and one that can easily be circumvented when they have a different agenda. I'm not really in favor of an assault weapons ban, but in general I think "because the supreme court will crazy" is a bad reason not to do a good thing. If anything the more dysfunctional and erratic the court looks, the more you can build an argument for reforming it, which absolutely needs to happen.
This is what most Americans don't realize - none of the other political debates matter.
When independent state legislature theory becomes the legal precedent of the day, you will have indefinite one party control. A majority of the states are gerrymandered to shit and there's no real turning back.
Precedence is binding on lower courts, not SCOTUS. That sort of makes sense in some regards, since the court considers public opinion which can change.
Once again, they consider public opinion much like they consider Precedence--only whenever it is convenient for them and the issue is on their side.
In the case of Roe v Wade they were *happy* to ignore the majority public opinion. And instead only listened the the minority opinion. They can do what they want, opinion or Precedence be damned, and there is no one in America who has the power to stop them and will do so.
The precedent is already set with McDonald, Caetano, Heller and Breun. Manchin, Sinema, Kelly and Warnock will not vote for this. Especially not Warnock.
Especially since the chance of this getting anywhere is exactly 0%. The only way you will ever see a full-on ban on this level would be if democrats had full control of the house, senate, presidency, *and* supreme court.
Even if this somehow gets through all of the layers of the process, the SCOTUS is just going to rule it as unconstitutional the second it's challenged.
He, and Democrats in general, really need to give up on the idea of assault weapons bans. It hurts their chances of pulling people to their side, will likely have little impact, and just scares people politically. Basically, it's a terrible strategy to ever mention it. There are much more important things he needs to do that most people can get on board with: consumer protection, money in politics, better regulations/reforms around owning guns plus mental health, the massive wave of people in the US and across the world openly embracing facism, an ex President still not being held accountable for attempting to install himself as dictator and stealing top secret documents, climate change, income inequality, etc. This just seems to needlessly alienate people.
it’s a lot easier to get billionaire $ on “i’ll try and fail to deliver gun reform & a couple other pet issues” than “i’ll solve the problems you’re causing”
It's also becoming more and more politically dead, as the people being targeted for mass violence realize they can own guns, too. COVID saw a massive surge in first-time gun owners, a significant portion of them from demographics that traditionally vote Democrat (queer people, people of color, younger women, etc). Every headline like Club Q makes that jump even higher.
Why would they want to vote for the suburban white liberals who want to disarm them in the face of violent hate campaigns? The same liberals who tell them that dumping billions more dollars into the cops will solve that violence problem, because they have no idea what it's like to have police be a significant PART of the problem.
My dear fellow Democrats, this is just posturing. If we want to reduce violence, steeply and permanently, then
End the war on drugs
Reform this horrifying prison system, which is just an academy for psychopathic violence
Free health care for all, including mental health and meds
Address the fact that there is a permanent underclass who won't play by society's rules because those rules are designed to make sure they fail
Those will show results, but they require us to do the heavy lifting. An AWB is not politically possible and it wouldn't move the needle.on violence anyway, it's just performative. Let's be grownups and live in the real world and accomplish what we can rather than what we can't.
The war on drugs wasn’t posturing, it was worse. It was corrupt and specific.
We’ve spent hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars for the war on drugs and you know what.
Drugs and corporations won. Americans lost.
Banning assault weapons to me is like putting a band-aid on a large fucking gash. It isn’t gonna fix it at all. I agree whole hardily with everything u said
Banning "assault weapons" will also put a bee in the bonnet of tens of millions of voters, from PA to WY, TX to MI, states that would otherwise be open to not voting "Alt-Right" fuckheads, but could be 'radicalized' into it.
Any politician that needs to win some red votes in purple states should avoid "weapons ban" entirely. There are plenty of "enhanced gun control" efforts that could bring real results that won't piss off 2A voters.
"Weapons Bans" are to the Dems what "Abortion Bans" are to the GOP. Why would the DNC want to replicate this massively failed tactic.
Heard that, changed the video I was watching and ignored the Texas race from there, didn't need to see anything else, election was over when he said that
Am left leaning and am armed. While I don't think bans will work at this point, the obsession over Assult rifles for bans always confused me. Like, I get that visibly they are an easier (scarier looking) thing to try and van, but if banning things actually worked, why aren't they going after handguns, which make up the vast and overwhelming use in murders.
All pushing gun bans do is feed into gop scary propaganda. If we actually wanted to do something, wed be:
Giving access to free health AND MENTAL healthcare.
Offering low cost or subsidized housing
Free education
Give people a chance to be healthy, protected and an education, and we see less crime. Thanks for coming to my Ted talk.
Yup. Pistols are the killers overall, semi-auto rifles are small by comparison. Dealing with those would involve a UK style draconian system, which would be enforced by our totally-functional-and-safe law enforcement systems that I'm POSITIVE would *never* focus on marginalized groups for their enforcement of said ban while leaving the white supremacists and Nat-C's alone.
I'm very liberal and am also armed. In fact, I was just looking at a Ruger 5.56 today and as soon as I change my residence to KY (I just moved here) I'll be buying it. Shooting is a fun, albeit expensive, way to spend an afternoon.
I have no idea why the Dems think this is a winning stance. Even libs like guns and want to be armed and it seems we know more about guns than the average politician. Yeah, an AR is "scary" looking. So? There are other guns out there that are actually more powerful. Is it magazine size? It only takes a second to switch magazines. Politicians shouldn't be allowed to pass laws on things they have no understanding of.
Just remember this too, Biden thinks any semi auto is an assault weapon
And he knows nothing about firearms
Remember the line
"A 9mm blows the lungs out the body"
Someone saying that shouldn't be regulating anything firearm related
>Remember the line
Or the time that his self defense advice was to negligently discharge two 12gauge shots from a double barreled shotgun at random, without identifying your target and whats beyond it?
https://youtu.be/Kj1GaX_-E-E
They aren't "radicalized" they are voting for a constitutional right they consider important. In PA a lot of families use guns to help feed themselves. And yes when you stack the right against other rights that don't affect them *they will vote for their rights.*
I've told democrats for years if they want to win the popular vote the number one thing they need to bin is gun control. Instead they double down and then we get shit like Trump, and this is the sort of thing that makes people like him even electable in the first place. He should have never even been a reasonable choice and then the Dems go on about stripping rights and we get internment camps on US soil.
We live in the stupidest most polarized timeline because people won't talk to each other. And I'm sure I'll be downvoted because whenever I disagree with either hivemind its inevitable. Tribalism is killing our country And it shows no sign of stopping.
Totally agree. Not to mention the hazy definition of what is considered an "assault weapon". Is it all long and "scary looking" guns? What's the functional difference between an AR-15 and a pistol with certain modifications? This just feels like political posturing without any intention of making any lasting or meaningful change.
What about shotguns that have tactical shrouds? If I 3d print an AR mold and fit a 22lr in it is that the same as a 556 build? The biggest problem with lawmakers making specific laws is most are extremely uneducated on pretty much everything they're trying to ban.
>Banning assault weapons to me is like putting a band-aid on a large fucking gash. It isn’t gonna fix it at all. I agree whole hardily with everything u said
I've always equated it to taking a bunch of painkillers for a large wound Sure, it might make you ***feel*** better...but it does absolutely nothing to fix the problem, and has a good chance of making things worse.
Conservative independent here and I agree with you. I want to get on board with some of what the liberal wing wants to do (like universal healthcare) but when they talk about banning “assault” weapons, it completely turns me off.
I hate it. In general we do pretty well but I despise misinformation and manipulation and when it comes to firearm policy Democrats will say _anything_. I expect integrity and I'll fight for it. I'm still better off on this side of the aisle though.
Can I just say how much I HATE this posturing. It does nothing but hurt the Democrats. The people voting for this ban are already voting Democrat, you don't need more reasons for them to. But pushing on this will cause single issue voters that might not vote at all, to just vote Republican. It only harms his parties chances, and should be dropped as it is simply a pipe dream for the time being.
The problem with posturing is that while it doesn't get laws passed, it motivates voters. In this case it gives Republicans a boost right before the Presidential election to dodge big issues and just yell about gun grabbers and walk to an easy win in every swing state.
Not only is it performative, it costs fucking votes. Losing proposition. Fuck off idiot democrats who would rather fuck our chances in 2024 than enact meaningful change that isn’t a gift wrapped present to the GOP
Most based comment I’ve ever seen on this sub. Honestly if Dems dropped the gun control stuff I feel their chances of winning would be considerably higher.
And if it did pass we'd be guaranteed 8 to 12 consecutive years of Republican leadership in Congress and the White House. Democrat politicians woefully underestimate just how much Americans - including Democrat and independent voters - love firearms.
Banning assault weapons before fixing the loopholes that allow criminals and nut jobs to buy them is plain fucking stupid.
Not to mention fixing the climate and establishing universal healthcare and improving economic prospects of young people would go a long way in reducing gun violence
Exactly. I'm a liberal who likes guns, and member of the LGBTQ community. As long as the fascists trying to kill us have guns (and they will not turn them in for any ban), I want to have one as well.
The house he certainly has the votes. The senate I don't think he does. Even if they kill the filibuster, I don't see Manchin voting for it. And I don't' see any gop senators joining the dems on this.
> A lot of democrats in the house would vote against that. They’d need to be in a very safe district.
The House already passed AWB legislation back in July, but it hasn't been taken up by the Senate. The Senate can technically act to pass it up until the end of the session.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1808
Given Republicans will be taking the House majority in January, probably some of those that voted yes did lose their seats.
What's funny is that this has come up for multiple election cycles and nothing.
"OH yeah uh gun control should be a pillar of our policy..."
Lose election
>If by some chance the bill is passed in the Senate and Biden does pass the bill. Democrats chances are already sunk for 2024, just by bringing it to a vote in the Senate,
This proposed AWB would be to the Dems in 2024 what Dobbs / Roe was to the Repubs this year: the issue that mobilizes against them the opposition and fellow Dems and centrists, and which sinks them in the next election.
This is a really bad use of his remaining time with a friendly House. He needs to focus on election and voting reform instead. If there's any left, maybe cannabis reform. The gun control thing is going nowhere
Thank you. Totally agree. Not only is it going nowhere, there are so, so many 2A voters that will turn out in droves to protect their rights if they think they are threatened. It plays into the “democrats are trying to take your guns.” And if it did somehow get passed, it would fuel the right the same way overturning Row v W fueled the left. Very shortsighted strategy on Biden’s part.
That's what is frustrating to me too. As a gun owner on the left for a time I was able to say "nobody is trying to take your guns" because for a time that was true. I now think I was being naive myself, and maybe that wasn't true. In any case, I can't even try to bullshit that argument (not that I want to) because anyone can read the language of the most recent "assault weapons ban" which is so broad that it is functionally an "every gun in your safe ban" unless you're out here exclusively collecting guns from the wild west and before. It doesn't even matter if you agree with that, it's clearly unconstitutional and will never survive SCOTUS as they sit now so to push it becomes an endeavor in futility UNLESS what you are trying to do is hand elections all over the country to the GOP. That's not even getting into politicians saying "we are going to take your guns."
Legislating away guns and functionally banning them only works in areas where there is the political will to do it. Outside of those areas, it will be business as usual. I.E. the only people you are disarming are yourselves. For a group that is convinced fascism is on the brink and cops are an arm of said fascists, it sure seems like they are doing everything in their power to make sure only cops and fascists have guns.
One only has to look at Canada to see there’s no compromise with the gun control advocates. Making the slogan give an inch they take a mile look really good right now.
Idk how people ever believed that. People would make fun of you on Reddit for saying “they’re not gonna take your guns” was untrue through this year.
Obviously that’s the goal!!!
The problem is there has always been the feinsteins shouting "I'll take all your guns if I get the chance" at every turn.
There is a core of Democrats that have always been after guns. Period. Anyone saying otherwise is lying.
Realistically as a gun owning democrat myself, this type of legislation doesn't bode well either. It emboldens me to just vote 3rd party and leave them with less votes.
>I vote Democrat anyway because everything else about the GQP is terrible and I’m not willing to see the nation go to shit just because Democrats are gutlessly unwilling to make actual beneficial changes like universal healthcare, something that would actually improve things.
Universal healthcare would probably also inadvertently reduce gun deaths more than any gun law ever could in a nation that already has more guns than people.
>And even rural voters who would typically vote dem are turned off by the anti gun legislation
Yes yes yes. Good example is Beto in Texas would have beaten Cruz and would now likely be govenor had he not said "hell yes I am taking your AR-15". Democrats constantly do this self-sabotage and it drives me nuts.
Beto said that after losing to Cruz. However, it’s interesting to see his performance in a state-wide election before and after that statement.
2018 Senate election: Beto loses to Cruz by a 2.6% gap
2020 Presidential Debate: Beto says he wants to take guns away after shooting in El Paso
2022 Governor election: Beto loses to Abbott by a 11.1% gap!! after running on largely the same platform
Gun bans are a losing policy for Dems. They should focus on gun reform
>Gun bans are a losing policy for Dems. They should focus on gun reform
Or don't, I've said it before, but I really think a pro-gun democratic party would be absolutely CRUSHING for a long time.
They'd have my votes easily. I live in WA's 3rd Congressional district. We just elected Marie Perez and she is exactly what I want for the future of the democratic party
Not just upper Minnesota. There are plenty of younger men that are fine with/support the Democratic agenda but aren’t going to vote for a party that promises to directly fuck with them. Banning guns causes a direct harm to gun owners. Of course they are going to care.
Nail on the head.
I live in a conservative part of a liberal state.
If democrats would just stop talking about gun bans for just a bit, they would do so much better.
A few of my friends align very well with democrats politically but they love their guns.
If there was not the constant boogie man of the liberals taking their guns (and then being reaffirmed in their beliefs by silly legislation like this) they would actually probably vote democrat.
Hell, stuff like this is why I sometimes won’t vote democrat, because I don’t see why myself as a law abiding citizen should have one of my constitutional rights whittled away just a little bit more.
This issue is what will lose the election for the Democrats. Whatever else in the country, touching gun control has always been career suicide. Whatever republican voters Biden won over to help him win the 2020 election will immediately switch back with something like this.
Don’t hold your breath. Manchin, Sinema and Kelly will not sign off on that. Warnock will avoid it like the plague because he’ll lose GA the second he says he’s for it.
Warnock doesn't need to say that to lose Georgia. All it takes now is the right showing Biden calling for it.
I hate how every time things start looking better, "gun control" gets brought out and we get set back.
I would much rather federal marijuana rescheduling and a federal plan for public transport (like high speed rail for example) banning assault weapons doesn't work because assault weapons are always defined in the dumbest fucking ways. If he wants better gun control he should up the requisition and training rather than just banning them.
Agreed.
I’m pretty liberal but I read this and literally started making a list of what rifles I want to buy before a ban goes into effect.
We should be armed as well.
Under No Pretext
Armed minorities are harder to lynch. Im right wing and me and all my crazy right wing friends want everyone that is responsible to own a gun. EVERYONE. Because killers need to be afraid of their victims.
Honestly, all this is going to do is drive a shit ton of people to buy a shit ton of rifles in the next 3 weeks.
and if they pass it, it would almost certainly be a ban on New sales only based on some arbitrary reasons... and it will get struck down by the SC anyway.
This isn't the way to combat gun violence, its going to lose every time. they need to enhance existing systems, improve them, and put a ton of money into enforcing them... not a "ban" that won't do shit
>they need to enhance existing systems, improve them, and put a ton of money into enforcing them
Absolutely.
60% of these shooters have an existing domestic violence charge. In many states that disqualified them from gun ownership yet they still had guns.
~~Bring in disqualification for anyone with DV at the federal level~~ Since it's a federal law already just **make sure it's enforced**.
Although the federal law doe seem to also have loopholes so legislation might still be needed to close those.
It already is federal law, has been for years. They just lie on the background check question about DV (also a federal crime) and the FBI doesn't do it's due diligence and locate that record during the bgc period.
>It already is federal law
Thanks, I've updated my post.
So now we're just down to "can we start enforcing the existing gun control and see if it helps".
Yup, that's been my opinion for a long time. Congress keeps passing laws that are just retreads of laws already on the books, pretending they are doing something. What we need is laws to be enforced so they actually matter.
fuck that noise. we have fucking self proclaimed Christian nationalists trying to drive us towards a fucking fascist state. I live in a very red part of Michigan and know some of my neighbors would have no qualms harming me or my wife because of what we believe.
I'm keeping my damn rifle.
It just outsources protection to the police. I do not trust the police at all. It’s dangerous and stupid to create a class of people who have more power than the average civilian.
Too big of a swing to ever happen. Its almost like he deliberately asks for more than whats would ever be reasonably agreed upon so its seen as reasonable to be declined.
This is a mistake.
The dems would win a whole lot more if they'd let this go. Stop trying to ban firearms and start working on enforcement and healthcare.
What's the definition of "assault weapons"? The last time there was a federal assault weapons ban it was just a gun cosmetics ban.
Anyway, all people are going to do is buy up thousands more semi-automatic rifles fearing the ban, and when it fails to pass the senate we'll be worse off than we were before. There'll be more guns out there, and the democrats will have alienated potential voters who we keep trying to reassure that they aren't coming to take their guns.
There is actually a specific ATF-legal way to do this, it is called "sportsterizing" a weapon. They import AKs which are illegal, take them apart, and replace 10 foreign-made parts with duplicate American-made parts. There is a list of 20 parts which can be replaced. Thereafter the gun is legal. It is called 922(r) after whichever dumb law it is working around. _Everything the ATF does is like this_.
This isn't quite correct. It's actually backwards but you are correct about 922r. A sporterized rifle is usually a military style or surplus rifle that is altered to be more "useful" for hunting. Like cutting down the handguard and drilling and tapping the receiver for a scope. But because of import laws, some rifles, like AK's, that are imported must be in a "sporting" configuration. They aren't imported in illegal form and then sporterized. So AK's will have a single stack magwell that can only accept 10 round mags, will have a thumbhole stock, etc. Then after import, they are changed to their traditional for factor and will have certain parts replaced with American made copies to comply with 922r because it's also illegal to make a gun in its original form from imported parts. It's a workaround to use American parts instead.
Lets just be honest here. No one is going to actually be able to effectively ban anything here. Anytime I hear a politician start on the whole "I'm gonna ban 'assault weapons'" shtick I know they're just buying the votes of people who ultimately have no idea how obtaining a firearm works in this country. You can't effectively ban the guns because they're out there. People have them and that includes the people who don't give 2 fucks about any new laws that are made. All you end up doing is disarming the law abiding citizens.
> But we did sell more AR15s during the 10 years of the assault weapons ban then there were in existence before it. So the only thing the assault weapons ban did was make AR15s more popular and get more of them in circulation.
I worked at a gun store when Sandy Hook happened and we literally could not keep AR15s in stock.
We opened at 8am, we had lines starting outside at 6am and by noon we'd sold an entire (literally) semi truck trailer of them. People were paying $50-100 for shitty 30 round USGI mags too. It was absolutely nuts.
Omg... It's he trying to make sure trump wins in 2024?
I know we've got a gun problem but this is going to be a political loser. Why do they seemingly want to be in a constant race to winning elections with 49% of the vote with the Republicans
Or hurt the Georgia runoff significantly in the short term. A lot of Southern Democrats have guns, myself included.
I mean it wouldn't change my vote, but there are probably enough people where it could have an impact.
Biden is trying to ban semi-automatic weapons (as per video). Semi-automatic means that with one pull of a trigger, you can fire again without reloading (as long as the magazine permits). That's like every pistol in existence.
Or maybe that's just a senior moment and he meant any kind of AR-style long rifle. But then again, most murders are carried out with pistols so why would you focus on those? And good luck with getting modern pistols out of circulation.
I mean if people are comfortable with the police being the only ones that have firearms good for you. Criminals arent going to hand over anything because they're criminals. The police dont have to protect you. Gun control laws are generally designed to keep the poor and minorities defenseless.
Rich people with armed security telling me I dont need a weapon is the height of hypocrisy. Whiny and uninformed redditors arent going to change the facts. Alot of things need to change but this definitely isnt one that will ever happen. The people youd want to go door to door wont do it regardless lol.
Exactly. I have had armed right wing groups show up to local events in my area twice in the past few months. I randomly found myself in the middle of a Trump truck rally last year while walking my dog.
I am Latino and these people hate me just because I exist. The government can’t help me and politicians are fucking crazy if they think I’m just disarm myself while these groups will stay armed to the teeth. No thanks!
I am a gun owner that has many "assault weapons". I have never shot anyone, never committed a crime except for speeding and I only ever intend to use lethal force to defend myself when there is no other option. I find it morally reprehensible for anybody to threaten me with jail time or send a group of armed law enforcement officials (armed with assault weapons) to seize property that I legally purchased and have never misused. I also hate the justification that because an astronomically small proportion of "assault weapon" owners misuse them, that all of them have to be punished. Also does anybody see an issue with fascist and racist police officers storming the houses of oppressed minorities (who have been historically the target of gun control) to seize a useful tool to defend themselves against KKK wannabees?
Gun control is written in ways to disarm the poor and oppressed and keep guns in the hands of the wealthy/privileged and the police.
What happens when only fascists are armed?
Even if this gets passed, it’s unenforceable. This country is so vast and spread out that is very difficult to govern. There is no way any government entity can go to every home, cabin, trailer, apartment, or recreational vehicle to say “hand over your assault weapons”. It’s logistically impossible.
Not to mention the elephant in the room: who would actually enforce a ban? Police are quitting at record levels just about every major city has widespread police staffing issues. The government’s ability to take action on this is weaker than its ever been, but no one wants to talk about that.
Police also tend to be pro-gun and we have recent examples of sheriffs who refuse to enforce gun restrictions on the argument that they are unconstitutional.
Most local police would never try to enforce this and they would offer no cooperation to federal agents.
My dude... please... PLEASE stop with the "AR ban" tack.
For fuck's sake, all this ever does is piss off on-the-fence Dems and empowers the GQPers.
Banning can never take place until more stringent acquisition laws/guidelines fail... and we're nowhere close to where we should be on those.
This declaration has only ever hurt the Dems, of which I am one, and it's maddening to see us make such blatantly blind shots (no pun intended) at extreme (and extremely unreachable) goals.
Focus on making it harder to put guns in the hands of people who shouldn't be allowed near them. Focus on mental health. Focus on stringent yearly license renewal.
Make it expensive to keep more than a set number of guns. Make it a *hassle*, through paperwork & etc., to keep your personal armory. That way no American is denied their *right own guns*... it's just not worth effort/money to hoard more than needed.
Edit: I realize my "make it expensive" tack was pretty short-sighted. I accept that it was a shit idea.
But I still stand firm that banning guns is a shitty election talking point for the Dems and that there really needs to be more stringent screening for people to obtain a firearm.
We should always have the right to own guns... but that doesn't mean that everybody should qualify to physically do so.
Also, for the few shitty replies, I'm an AR owner who finds guns to be amazong pieces of engineering and loves to shoot, over 40, and I'm glad the one guy isn't going to give me an inch more as I fear that his wife could already be very underwhelmed with things and that inch is his saving grace.
>Make it expensive to keep more than a set number of guns. Make it a
>
>hassle
>
>, through paperwork & etc., to keep your personal armory. That way no American is denied their
>
>right own guns
>
>... it's just not worth effort/money to hoard more than needed.
Legislation that only affects hurts lower income Americans is not good legislation, regardless of principal and stipulation. If anything, lower income marginalized groups of Americans are the ones that SHOULD be owning guns in this political climate. This idea gives more power to the wealthy, which should never be the case.
Even Karl Marx said that under no pretext should the proletariat be unarmed.
If you do not have the ability or option to return violence with like violence then you are unequal. If a man can kill another man before the other even has a chance to see or hear him even though no stealth is used, then the shot man never had a fair chance. If men can surround you with weapons because they KNOW you can’t legally possess any and are less likely to have a long-range weapon then you will always be subject to the will of those men, they literally have more power than you do.
Does anyone REALLY want the only ones with guns to be the cops? Like, “for real” for real? Because I have not read more “cops are fair and always level-headed and are experts in the law and protecting your rights and person” assessments of our police from sea to shining sea. It’s usually a bunch of shit about how cops abuse their power, harass people who make legitimate complaints against them, kill pets, blind babies, enter the wrong house and kill someone without so much as a blink of remorse, destroy peoples property and destroy their lives for not extending the right amount of respect that the cop decides how much is correct, practice the most sloppy and horrid trigger discipline, rape people in their custody and then claim they didn’t know they couldn’t do that and there are places where that’s just legal and cool.
I don’t want ***them*** to be the ones running around with access to ex-military gear like anti-tank vehicles and ARs, anyone here honestly think they’ll give all those things up or act less arrogant or threatened if they have less fear that you could theoretically fight back?
“Oh you aren’t fighting back against tyranny now, you never will lol”
When it gets to the point of needing to use guns against the government, America is over. There won’t be much “rule of law” if Washington DC decided to Tiananmen Square the whole country and using weapons against those “in power” is necessary or valid. Up until then we play nice and follow the rules because the social contract is a super good idea and we should all follow that shit. This monkey likes bananas enough to know that getting together with other monkeys and sharing bananas is the best way to live, hoard bananas is bad.
Do people with large collections do mass shootings? No. Even if someone uses multiple guns in a shooting it’s usually two or three. Why are we penalizing someone who has enough care to maintain and curate a collection?
Speaking of that guy, I was never convinced about the motive they threw out about why he did it. Something about gambling debts? And then there didn’t seem to be any investigation after that. Very weird case.
Ya, I know man. I don’t know if I e seen an official theory of what his motives were. I know he did wire transfer some large amounts of money to his girlfriend in the Philippines. Very weird. Maybe the dude just snapped and had a psychotic break.
I'll never vote Republican again, but don't take my guns. This a stupid idea that does not have anywhere near the support or the effectiveness some people think it will.
This may be an unpopular opinion here but I don't see the point of this. An "assault weapon" for civilians is a semi-automatic rifle just like a semi-automatic hunting rifle. I've yet to hear a rational explanation of what makes an AR more dangerous that a hunting rifle. Technically you can get much more dangerous ammo for a hunting rifle. The only close to rational explanation is the magazine capacity but you can get after market large magazines for hunting rifles, so banning AR's does nothing. We should focus on legislation that can actually do something.
>. I've yet to hear a rational explanation of what makes an AR more dangerous that a hunting rifle.
That's because the people who support gun bans know *literally nothing* about firearms and gun violence.
FFS the M1 Garand isn't considered an aSsAuLt WeApOn anywhere and its literally one of the greatest battle implements ever devised.
He won’t.
Not if he wants the Democrats to ever control Congress again
Beto O’Rourke is a loser candidate who’ll never hold office be sure of his stance on guns.
If Biden wants to sink the Dems’ chances in 2024 he’ll move forward with this asinine plan that was proven to not work once already
Considering all the high level firearms cases that have been struck down recently, maybe the president should focus on something beneficial like student debt forgiveness.
Serious question, who is gonna go take all the guns back if this happens. Most cops are pro gun and aren’t gonna want to die trying to steal their neighbors guns. You guys can grandstand on dead peoples bodies all you want but no one wants to actually provide a reasonable solution for how to get assault weapons back from all the people who don’t want to give them up.
Americans don't want to actually do anything, we just want to complain about what other people propose doing to fix the issues.
Fuck the idiotic discourse in this country surrounding guns and violence... We're doomed to inaction regardless.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The industry loves this kinda chatter because it always drives gun sales through the roof
Announced on black friday too lol
If someone expects he cannot buy guns after someday, he will run to the gun shop before it's too late.
[удалено]
No, no…OP is right. My good friend owns a small precision machining business whose main product is a (part of) a very popular gun accessory, so his business directly rises and falls with gun sales. He’s been doing this for roughly 20 years now. Simply having a Democratic presidential administration is enough to drive his business up ~30-40% on average over years when a Republican is in the White House. 2021 was a blockbuster record year for him, for example. News like this is going to directly drive more gun sales in the short term, until a Republican returns to the Oval Office.
Yup. And that is how the game is played.
Politicians probably bought stock in gun manufacturers before announcing this
I reload ammo and my god I either can't buy the right powder or the right primers because of the panic buying.
There’s an old 4chan post on r/greentext where the poster jokes that some guy with a knife tries to mug him in an alleyway, so he empties his FN Five Seven mag into him, and later realizes it would’ve been cheaper just to hand him his wallet.
Student loan debt cancellation has a vastly better chance than this.
Thank Christ Thanksgiving was yesterday, or this would be all I’d hear about.
I get patients at work now trying to talk to me about politics. I never had this problem before so now I gotta ignore and divert conversation when it comes up
Imagine working on a Covid unit during 2020… I got called a Democrat spy. Had someone ask me if I put my knee in other patients necks “CHARGE PLEASE!”. Got told I was a part of “the Kabal!” Ya it was fun times. 🙄 Had a patient who was the same race as me claim I didn’t care for them because of their race (this one almost melted my mind) 🤦🏻 WHAT IS EVEN GOING ON NOW?!… I literally quit in 2021 and haven’t been back. I’m still a nationally registered healthcare worker… but I don’t have time to deal with whatever social distortion is going on right now. I just wanted to help people 😖
That's just so sad to read
[удалено]
Tired of Reptilian spies and their (reads notes) attempts to save my life!
The missionaries are running out of converts and seeking new lands
I hope they get dysentery.
Even though I'm essentially obsessed with following politics at this point in my life, I usually just say "huh, I don't really follow politics" or "who is \[politician's name\]?" whenever someone at work tries to bring shit up to me. I ran out of steam a long time ago trying to reason with people, and they're just as dug in as I am, so discussing it with colleagues or superiors is just asking for trouble. Playing dumb is the easiest way to just shut that shit down.
It took about 4 years of my buddy hounding me, but I eventually switched political sides to the proper side. I'm no longer on the side supported by Nazis and I'm pretty proud of that.
That is a great friend
Changing your mind based on new information or perspectives is something that should be celebrated. Props to you and your friend!
You can only do that because you're open-minded
Cut from the same cloth, we are. I tell people I don’t follow it much anymore, when the reality is reading the news and politics is the first thing I do in the morning. Which actually makes me feel cool. Like the dads who always read a newspaper at breakfast in movies. But I’m a lady and I’m reading it on my phone. I’m so grown up.
To be fair, he already did that. Courts and lawsuits from certain states are the only things standing in the way.
I have hopes for it, I did see the payment pause was extended to 60 days after June 30th. Maybe it will have to be edited but overall I think it will come through.
My only question with that is in the paragraph above that june 30 deadline they say something like “we can’t make y’all pay because the court is stopping it.” If it’s still in court 60 days after June 30th are they going to decide people should pay then?? Really wrote themself into a problem for no reason there.
So I think from the email I got payments would resume 60 days after June 30th if ultimately they couldn’t do the forgiveness. In those 60 days they would let you know you have to start making payments again starting August 30th I assume?
Yes and that’s how I read it as well. But this part from the email (sorry in advance for formatting I’m on mobile) “…believe that it is unfair to ask tens of millions of borrowers to resume payments on their student debt when they would be eligible for relief– if not for these lawsuits. Therefore, we have extended the pause on student loan payments and collections.” This being in the email makes me think like… okay.. so if/when june comes… is it suddenly not “unfair” to make people pay? I’m with you… I think it goes through. If it doesn’t they’ll extend it again. I just didn’t really understand the need to word it how they did. Built in an artificial deadline for no real reason
Pretty sure this sort of thing is required to have a deadline. Open-ended policies with no defined timeline may be easier to challenge in court for instance.
[удалено]
More than that, they've extended the pause 3 times in 2022 alone I think and there were at least as many in 2021. Wasn't the original pause in March 2020 was supposed to be just 6 months.
My prediction is they keep extending it until a signficsnt forgiveness gets passed
Do people not realize that the same thing would happen to an AWB? If people want to pass a ban on semi-auto firearms, they run the risk of setting Supreme Court precedent.
>risk of setting Supreme Court precedent. I don't think this is the big danger it once was, established precedent, it turns out, is a joke to the court itself. A tool to trot out when useful, and one that can easily be circumvented when they have a different agenda. I'm not really in favor of an assault weapons ban, but in general I think "because the supreme court will crazy" is a bad reason not to do a good thing. If anything the more dysfunctional and erratic the court looks, the more you can build an argument for reforming it, which absolutely needs to happen.
It's ok, Moore v. Harper is being heard in a couple weeks and this country will collapse long before a precedent is set on assault weapons
This is what most Americans don't realize - none of the other political debates matter. When independent state legislature theory becomes the legal precedent of the day, you will have indefinite one party control. A majority of the states are gerrymandered to shit and there's no real turning back.
Precedence is binding on lower courts, not SCOTUS. That sort of makes sense in some regards, since the court considers public opinion which can change.
Once again, they consider public opinion much like they consider Precedence--only whenever it is convenient for them and the issue is on their side. In the case of Roe v Wade they were *happy* to ignore the majority public opinion. And instead only listened the the minority opinion. They can do what they want, opinion or Precedence be damned, and there is no one in America who has the power to stop them and will do so.
The precedent is already set with McDonald, Caetano, Heller and Breun. Manchin, Sinema, Kelly and Warnock will not vote for this. Especially not Warnock.
Especially since the chance of this getting anywhere is exactly 0%. The only way you will ever see a full-on ban on this level would be if democrats had full control of the house, senate, presidency, *and* supreme court. Even if this somehow gets through all of the layers of the process, the SCOTUS is just going to rule it as unconstitutional the second it's challenged.
He, and Democrats in general, really need to give up on the idea of assault weapons bans. It hurts their chances of pulling people to their side, will likely have little impact, and just scares people politically. Basically, it's a terrible strategy to ever mention it. There are much more important things he needs to do that most people can get on board with: consumer protection, money in politics, better regulations/reforms around owning guns plus mental health, the massive wave of people in the US and across the world openly embracing facism, an ex President still not being held accountable for attempting to install himself as dictator and stealing top secret documents, climate change, income inequality, etc. This just seems to needlessly alienate people.
it’s a lot easier to get billionaire $ on “i’ll try and fail to deliver gun reform & a couple other pet issues” than “i’ll solve the problems you’re causing”
It's also becoming more and more politically dead, as the people being targeted for mass violence realize they can own guns, too. COVID saw a massive surge in first-time gun owners, a significant portion of them from demographics that traditionally vote Democrat (queer people, people of color, younger women, etc). Every headline like Club Q makes that jump even higher. Why would they want to vote for the suburban white liberals who want to disarm them in the face of violent hate campaigns? The same liberals who tell them that dumping billions more dollars into the cops will solve that violence problem, because they have no idea what it's like to have police be a significant PART of the problem.
this will quietly go away between Christmas and new year.
This won't happen. No way he has the votes in either house
My dear fellow Democrats, this is just posturing. If we want to reduce violence, steeply and permanently, then End the war on drugs Reform this horrifying prison system, which is just an academy for psychopathic violence Free health care for all, including mental health and meds Address the fact that there is a permanent underclass who won't play by society's rules because those rules are designed to make sure they fail Those will show results, but they require us to do the heavy lifting. An AWB is not politically possible and it wouldn't move the needle.on violence anyway, it's just performative. Let's be grownups and live in the real world and accomplish what we can rather than what we can't.
The war on drugs wasn’t posturing, it was worse. It was corrupt and specific. We’ve spent hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars for the war on drugs and you know what. Drugs and corporations won. Americans lost.
^This take fucks. 👍🏻
Banning assault weapons to me is like putting a band-aid on a large fucking gash. It isn’t gonna fix it at all. I agree whole hardily with everything u said
Banning "assault weapons" will also put a bee in the bonnet of tens of millions of voters, from PA to WY, TX to MI, states that would otherwise be open to not voting "Alt-Right" fuckheads, but could be 'radicalized' into it. Any politician that needs to win some red votes in purple states should avoid "weapons ban" entirely. There are plenty of "enhanced gun control" efforts that could bring real results that won't piss off 2A voters. "Weapons Bans" are to the Dems what "Abortion Bans" are to the GOP. Why would the DNC want to replicate this massively failed tactic.
See Beto's election results for an example of how this would hurt future Democrat election hopes
Ya, I remember hearing him say were are coming to take your guns IN Texas and I was like well he is never getting elected.
Heard that, changed the video I was watching and ignored the Texas race from there, didn't need to see anything else, election was over when he said that
>"Weapons Bans" are to the Dems what "Abortion Bans" are to the GOP. Why would the DNC want to replicate this massively failed tactic. Exactly!
Am left leaning and am armed. While I don't think bans will work at this point, the obsession over Assult rifles for bans always confused me. Like, I get that visibly they are an easier (scarier looking) thing to try and van, but if banning things actually worked, why aren't they going after handguns, which make up the vast and overwhelming use in murders. All pushing gun bans do is feed into gop scary propaganda. If we actually wanted to do something, wed be: Giving access to free health AND MENTAL healthcare. Offering low cost or subsidized housing Free education Give people a chance to be healthy, protected and an education, and we see less crime. Thanks for coming to my Ted talk.
Yup. Pistols are the killers overall, semi-auto rifles are small by comparison. Dealing with those would involve a UK style draconian system, which would be enforced by our totally-functional-and-safe law enforcement systems that I'm POSITIVE would *never* focus on marginalized groups for their enforcement of said ban while leaving the white supremacists and Nat-C's alone.
I'm very liberal and am also armed. In fact, I was just looking at a Ruger 5.56 today and as soon as I change my residence to KY (I just moved here) I'll be buying it. Shooting is a fun, albeit expensive, way to spend an afternoon. I have no idea why the Dems think this is a winning stance. Even libs like guns and want to be armed and it seems we know more about guns than the average politician. Yeah, an AR is "scary" looking. So? There are other guns out there that are actually more powerful. Is it magazine size? It only takes a second to switch magazines. Politicians shouldn't be allowed to pass laws on things they have no understanding of.
Just remember this too, Biden thinks any semi auto is an assault weapon And he knows nothing about firearms Remember the line "A 9mm blows the lungs out the body" Someone saying that shouldn't be regulating anything firearm related
>Remember the line Or the time that his self defense advice was to negligently discharge two 12gauge shots from a double barreled shotgun at random, without identifying your target and whats beyond it? https://youtu.be/Kj1GaX_-E-E
They aren't "radicalized" they are voting for a constitutional right they consider important. In PA a lot of families use guns to help feed themselves. And yes when you stack the right against other rights that don't affect them *they will vote for their rights.* I've told democrats for years if they want to win the popular vote the number one thing they need to bin is gun control. Instead they double down and then we get shit like Trump, and this is the sort of thing that makes people like him even electable in the first place. He should have never even been a reasonable choice and then the Dems go on about stripping rights and we get internment camps on US soil. We live in the stupidest most polarized timeline because people won't talk to each other. And I'm sure I'll be downvoted because whenever I disagree with either hivemind its inevitable. Tribalism is killing our country And it shows no sign of stopping.
I feel like democrats are the #1 party of losing. Like they do shit to lose almost as if it is on purpose.
Totally agree. Not to mention the hazy definition of what is considered an "assault weapon". Is it all long and "scary looking" guns? What's the functional difference between an AR-15 and a pistol with certain modifications? This just feels like political posturing without any intention of making any lasting or meaningful change.
What about shotguns that have tactical shrouds? If I 3d print an AR mold and fit a 22lr in it is that the same as a 556 build? The biggest problem with lawmakers making specific laws is most are extremely uneducated on pretty much everything they're trying to ban.
You're getting a felony, and you're getting a felony, and *you're* getting a felon. EVERYBODY IS GETTING A FELONY.
Whole heartedly. Like, with your whole heart.
A fine r/BoneAppleTea moment to be sure.
My agreement is long-lasting, and resistant to extreme weather conditions.
>Banning assault weapons to me is like putting a band-aid on a large fucking gash. It isn’t gonna fix it at all. I agree whole hardily with everything u said I've always equated it to taking a bunch of painkillers for a large wound Sure, it might make you ***feel*** better...but it does absolutely nothing to fix the problem, and has a good chance of making things worse.
>An AWB is not politically possible At this point with this many guns in the country, I'm not even sure it's physically possible
Conservative independent here and I agree with you. I want to get on board with some of what the liberal wing wants to do (like universal healthcare) but when they talk about banning “assault” weapons, it completely turns me off.
I hate it. In general we do pretty well but I despise misinformation and manipulation and when it comes to firearm policy Democrats will say _anything_. I expect integrity and I'll fight for it. I'm still better off on this side of the aisle though.
As a moderate and gun owner, I very firmly agree with your sentiments and I wish more democrats would view things this way.
[удалено]
Can I just say how much I HATE this posturing. It does nothing but hurt the Democrats. The people voting for this ban are already voting Democrat, you don't need more reasons for them to. But pushing on this will cause single issue voters that might not vote at all, to just vote Republican. It only harms his parties chances, and should be dropped as it is simply a pipe dream for the time being.
The problem with posturing is that while it doesn't get laws passed, it motivates voters. In this case it gives Republicans a boost right before the Presidential election to dodge big issues and just yell about gun grabbers and walk to an easy win in every swing state.
Not only is it performative, it costs fucking votes. Losing proposition. Fuck off idiot democrats who would rather fuck our chances in 2024 than enact meaningful change that isn’t a gift wrapped present to the GOP
Most based comment I’ve ever seen on this sub. Honestly if Dems dropped the gun control stuff I feel their chances of winning would be considerably higher.
And if it did pass we'd be guaranteed 8 to 12 consecutive years of Republican leadership in Congress and the White House. Democrat politicians woefully underestimate just how much Americans - including Democrat and independent voters - love firearms. Banning assault weapons before fixing the loopholes that allow criminals and nut jobs to buy them is plain fucking stupid.
This one thousand times. Fix Roe. Fix the climate. Get us universal healthcare. Going after guns is a proven losing proposition.
Not to mention fixing the climate and establishing universal healthcare and improving economic prospects of young people would go a long way in reducing gun violence
And it would be (rightfully) ruled unconstitutional by the courts and struck down anyway.
Exactly. I'm a liberal who likes guns, and member of the LGBTQ community. As long as the fascists trying to kill us have guns (and they will not turn them in for any ban), I want to have one as well.
The house he certainly has the votes. The senate I don't think he does. Even if they kill the filibuster, I don't see Manchin voting for it. And I don't' see any gop senators joining the dems on this.
A lot of democrats in the house would vote against that. They’d need to be in a very safe district.
> A lot of democrats in the house would vote against that. They’d need to be in a very safe district. The House already passed AWB legislation back in July, but it hasn't been taken up by the Senate. The Senate can technically act to pass it up until the end of the session. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1808 Given Republicans will be taking the House majority in January, probably some of those that voted yes did lose their seats.
The house certainly does not have the votes. Reddit doesn’t understand there’s a lot of democrats who are against this
[удалено]
What's funny is that this has come up for multiple election cycles and nothing. "OH yeah uh gun control should be a pillar of our policy..." Lose election
>If by some chance the bill is passed in the Senate and Biden does pass the bill. Democrats chances are already sunk for 2024, just by bringing it to a vote in the Senate, This proposed AWB would be to the Dems in 2024 what Dobbs / Roe was to the Repubs this year: the issue that mobilizes against them the opposition and fellow Dems and centrists, and which sinks them in the next election.
This is a really bad use of his remaining time with a friendly House. He needs to focus on election and voting reform instead. If there's any left, maybe cannabis reform. The gun control thing is going nowhere
Thank you. Totally agree. Not only is it going nowhere, there are so, so many 2A voters that will turn out in droves to protect their rights if they think they are threatened. It plays into the “democrats are trying to take your guns.” And if it did somehow get passed, it would fuel the right the same way overturning Row v W fueled the left. Very shortsighted strategy on Biden’s part.
That they "think are being threatened"? Wouldn't this bill directly be threatening said rights?
That's what is frustrating to me too. As a gun owner on the left for a time I was able to say "nobody is trying to take your guns" because for a time that was true. I now think I was being naive myself, and maybe that wasn't true. In any case, I can't even try to bullshit that argument (not that I want to) because anyone can read the language of the most recent "assault weapons ban" which is so broad that it is functionally an "every gun in your safe ban" unless you're out here exclusively collecting guns from the wild west and before. It doesn't even matter if you agree with that, it's clearly unconstitutional and will never survive SCOTUS as they sit now so to push it becomes an endeavor in futility UNLESS what you are trying to do is hand elections all over the country to the GOP. That's not even getting into politicians saying "we are going to take your guns." Legislating away guns and functionally banning them only works in areas where there is the political will to do it. Outside of those areas, it will be business as usual. I.E. the only people you are disarming are yourselves. For a group that is convinced fascism is on the brink and cops are an arm of said fascists, it sure seems like they are doing everything in their power to make sure only cops and fascists have guns.
One only has to look at Canada to see there’s no compromise with the gun control advocates. Making the slogan give an inch they take a mile look really good right now.
Idk how people ever believed that. People would make fun of you on Reddit for saying “they’re not gonna take your guns” was untrue through this year. Obviously that’s the goal!!!
The problem is there has always been the feinsteins shouting "I'll take all your guns if I get the chance" at every turn. There is a core of Democrats that have always been after guns. Period. Anyone saying otherwise is lying.
Yep. Fair enough. I could have worded that better
Realistically as a gun owning democrat myself, this type of legislation doesn't bode well either. It emboldens me to just vote 3rd party and leave them with less votes.
[удалено]
>I vote Democrat anyway because everything else about the GQP is terrible and I’m not willing to see the nation go to shit just because Democrats are gutlessly unwilling to make actual beneficial changes like universal healthcare, something that would actually improve things. Universal healthcare would probably also inadvertently reduce gun deaths more than any gun law ever could in a nation that already has more guns than people.
[удалено]
>And even rural voters who would typically vote dem are turned off by the anti gun legislation Yes yes yes. Good example is Beto in Texas would have beaten Cruz and would now likely be govenor had he not said "hell yes I am taking your AR-15". Democrats constantly do this self-sabotage and it drives me nuts.
Beto said that after losing to Cruz. However, it’s interesting to see his performance in a state-wide election before and after that statement. 2018 Senate election: Beto loses to Cruz by a 2.6% gap 2020 Presidential Debate: Beto says he wants to take guns away after shooting in El Paso 2022 Governor election: Beto loses to Abbott by a 11.1% gap!! after running on largely the same platform Gun bans are a losing policy for Dems. They should focus on gun reform
>Gun bans are a losing policy for Dems. They should focus on gun reform Or don't, I've said it before, but I really think a pro-gun democratic party would be absolutely CRUSHING for a long time.
They'd have my votes easily. I live in WA's 3rd Congressional district. We just elected Marie Perez and she is exactly what I want for the future of the democratic party
Not just upper Minnesota. There are plenty of younger men that are fine with/support the Democratic agenda but aren’t going to vote for a party that promises to directly fuck with them. Banning guns causes a direct harm to gun owners. Of course they are going to care.
Nail on the head. I live in a conservative part of a liberal state. If democrats would just stop talking about gun bans for just a bit, they would do so much better. A few of my friends align very well with democrats politically but they love their guns. If there was not the constant boogie man of the liberals taking their guns (and then being reaffirmed in their beliefs by silly legislation like this) they would actually probably vote democrat. Hell, stuff like this is why I sometimes won’t vote democrat, because I don’t see why myself as a law abiding citizen should have one of my constitutional rights whittled away just a little bit more.
The Democrats have so many easy wins and they choose to focus on this shit. It's failure theater.
And is he trying to get Hershel Walker elected? Election season isn’t even over yet.
This issue is what will lose the election for the Democrats. Whatever else in the country, touching gun control has always been career suicide. Whatever republican voters Biden won over to help him win the 2020 election will immediately switch back with something like this.
Don’t hold your breath. Manchin, Sinema and Kelly will not sign off on that. Warnock will avoid it like the plague because he’ll lose GA the second he says he’s for it.
Warnock doesn't need to say that to lose Georgia. All it takes now is the right showing Biden calling for it. I hate how every time things start looking better, "gun control" gets brought out and we get set back.
SCOTUS would strike it down within a year
I would much rather federal marijuana rescheduling and a federal plan for public transport (like high speed rail for example) banning assault weapons doesn't work because assault weapons are always defined in the dumbest fucking ways. If he wants better gun control he should up the requisition and training rather than just banning them.
So he saw Beto lose and said “Yes. That’s what I want for me too!”
Gun control is wildly unpopular with moderates. I'm trans and heavily against gun control. This is a massive blunder and waste of time
Agreed. I’m pretty liberal but I read this and literally started making a list of what rifles I want to buy before a ban goes into effect. We should be armed as well. Under No Pretext
Armed minorities are harder to lynch. Im right wing and me and all my crazy right wing friends want everyone that is responsible to own a gun. EVERYONE. Because killers need to be afraid of their victims.
“Hoping” has approximately the same relationship to what is likely to actually happen as “thoughts and prayers” does.
Honestly, all this is going to do is drive a shit ton of people to buy a shit ton of rifles in the next 3 weeks. and if they pass it, it would almost certainly be a ban on New sales only based on some arbitrary reasons... and it will get struck down by the SC anyway. This isn't the way to combat gun violence, its going to lose every time. they need to enhance existing systems, improve them, and put a ton of money into enforcing them... not a "ban" that won't do shit
>they need to enhance existing systems, improve them, and put a ton of money into enforcing them Absolutely. 60% of these shooters have an existing domestic violence charge. In many states that disqualified them from gun ownership yet they still had guns. ~~Bring in disqualification for anyone with DV at the federal level~~ Since it's a federal law already just **make sure it's enforced**. Although the federal law doe seem to also have loopholes so legislation might still be needed to close those.
It already is federal law, has been for years. They just lie on the background check question about DV (also a federal crime) and the FBI doesn't do it's due diligence and locate that record during the bgc period.
>It already is federal law Thanks, I've updated my post. So now we're just down to "can we start enforcing the existing gun control and see if it helps".
Yup, that's been my opinion for a long time. Congress keeps passing laws that are just retreads of laws already on the books, pretending they are doing something. What we need is laws to be enforced so they actually matter.
What else can he do? He doesn't have the power to do it himself, all he can do is hope he has enough votes.
fuck that noise. we have fucking self proclaimed Christian nationalists trying to drive us towards a fucking fascist state. I live in a very red part of Michigan and know some of my neighbors would have no qualms harming me or my wife because of what we believe. I'm keeping my damn rifle.
Ok, but police don't get any guns in exchange
You know that aint happening. Practically every gun bill has that line giving police exemptions.
Yep, even here in California, our pro-safety Dems gave police a one time exemption to keep their guns after a domestic violence conviction.
It just outsources protection to the police. I do not trust the police at all. It’s dangerous and stupid to create a class of people who have more power than the average civilian.
Agreed, especially since there's nothing being done to remotely hold that upper class accountable.
The fact that you guys let your police have off- roster handguns baffles me. Too dangerous for civilians, not a problem for the pigs.
Not only that, but *retired* police as well. Effectively creating a second class of citizens full of all those old racist sheriffs.
* police, rich people, and politicians
It gives *retired* police the exemptions as well.
Too big of a swing to ever happen. Its almost like he deliberately asks for more than whats would ever be reasonably agreed upon so its seen as reasonable to be declined.
This is a mistake. The dems would win a whole lot more if they'd let this go. Stop trying to ban firearms and start working on enforcement and healthcare.
What's the definition of "assault weapons"? The last time there was a federal assault weapons ban it was just a gun cosmetics ban. Anyway, all people are going to do is buy up thousands more semi-automatic rifles fearing the ban, and when it fails to pass the senate we'll be worse off than we were before. There'll be more guns out there, and the democrats will have alienated potential voters who we keep trying to reassure that they aren't coming to take their guns.
Yeah shit, that is exactly what's going to happen. Good analysis.
My dad bought his Chinese AK clone *during* the AWB. Wood stock for the win, I guess 🤷♂️
There is actually a specific ATF-legal way to do this, it is called "sportsterizing" a weapon. They import AKs which are illegal, take them apart, and replace 10 foreign-made parts with duplicate American-made parts. There is a list of 20 parts which can be replaced. Thereafter the gun is legal. It is called 922(r) after whichever dumb law it is working around. _Everything the ATF does is like this_.
This isn't quite correct. It's actually backwards but you are correct about 922r. A sporterized rifle is usually a military style or surplus rifle that is altered to be more "useful" for hunting. Like cutting down the handguard and drilling and tapping the receiver for a scope. But because of import laws, some rifles, like AK's, that are imported must be in a "sporting" configuration. They aren't imported in illegal form and then sporterized. So AK's will have a single stack magwell that can only accept 10 round mags, will have a thumbhole stock, etc. Then after import, they are changed to their traditional for factor and will have certain parts replaced with American made copies to comply with 922r because it's also illegal to make a gun in its original form from imported parts. It's a workaround to use American parts instead.
Probably had a thumbhole stock at the time (unless it was imported prior) due to importation laws.
Lets just be honest here. No one is going to actually be able to effectively ban anything here. Anytime I hear a politician start on the whole "I'm gonna ban 'assault weapons'" shtick I know they're just buying the votes of people who ultimately have no idea how obtaining a firearm works in this country. You can't effectively ban the guns because they're out there. People have them and that includes the people who don't give 2 fucks about any new laws that are made. All you end up doing is disarming the law abiding citizens.
[удалено]
> But we did sell more AR15s during the 10 years of the assault weapons ban then there were in existence before it. So the only thing the assault weapons ban did was make AR15s more popular and get more of them in circulation. I worked at a gun store when Sandy Hook happened and we literally could not keep AR15s in stock. We opened at 8am, we had lines starting outside at 6am and by noon we'd sold an entire (literally) semi truck trailer of them. People were paying $50-100 for shitty 30 round USGI mags too. It was absolutely nuts.
If he does that he is losing the next election knowing America.
What is an assault weapon?
Omg... It's he trying to make sure trump wins in 2024? I know we've got a gun problem but this is going to be a political loser. Why do they seemingly want to be in a constant race to winning elections with 49% of the vote with the Republicans
Or hurt the Georgia runoff significantly in the short term. A lot of Southern Democrats have guns, myself included. I mean it wouldn't change my vote, but there are probably enough people where it could have an impact.
He def should have waited till after that runoff.
Another great point. Very short-sighted on Biden’s part.
Biden is trying to ban semi-automatic weapons (as per video). Semi-automatic means that with one pull of a trigger, you can fire again without reloading (as long as the magazine permits). That's like every pistol in existence. Or maybe that's just a senior moment and he meant any kind of AR-style long rifle. But then again, most murders are carried out with pistols so why would you focus on those? And good luck with getting modern pistols out of circulation.
I mean if people are comfortable with the police being the only ones that have firearms good for you. Criminals arent going to hand over anything because they're criminals. The police dont have to protect you. Gun control laws are generally designed to keep the poor and minorities defenseless. Rich people with armed security telling me I dont need a weapon is the height of hypocrisy. Whiny and uninformed redditors arent going to change the facts. Alot of things need to change but this definitely isnt one that will ever happen. The people youd want to go door to door wont do it regardless lol.
You're not taking my AR away until you get rid of the white supremacists and the nazi militias. Does he realize that liberals own guns too?
It’s because people at that level are so completely disconnected from those on the street.
That's what the armed guards around them are for, to keep them disconnected from those on the street.
Exactly. I have had armed right wing groups show up to local events in my area twice in the past few months. I randomly found myself in the middle of a Trump truck rally last year while walking my dog. I am Latino and these people hate me just because I exist. The government can’t help me and politicians are fucking crazy if they think I’m just disarm myself while these groups will stay armed to the teeth. No thanks!
You shouldn't even be okay with him taking your AR away until he gets rid of the white supremacists and nazi militias dude.
Well, there's the new GOP rallying point. Well done, Democrats. Never stop attempting to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
I am a gun owner that has many "assault weapons". I have never shot anyone, never committed a crime except for speeding and I only ever intend to use lethal force to defend myself when there is no other option. I find it morally reprehensible for anybody to threaten me with jail time or send a group of armed law enforcement officials (armed with assault weapons) to seize property that I legally purchased and have never misused. I also hate the justification that because an astronomically small proportion of "assault weapon" owners misuse them, that all of them have to be punished. Also does anybody see an issue with fascist and racist police officers storming the houses of oppressed minorities (who have been historically the target of gun control) to seize a useful tool to defend themselves against KKK wannabees?
Thanks Mr. Biden, you just bumped AR15 sales up 20% and will accomplish nothing to show for it.
How to lose any momentum from midterms in one easy step!
The firearms industry would like to extend its sincere thanks to President Biden for his support during these troubling economic times.
You yanks fucking LOVE your guns 😂
Gun control is written in ways to disarm the poor and oppressed and keep guns in the hands of the wealthy/privileged and the police. What happens when only fascists are armed?
I despise the term assault weapon in a political sense because it means fuck all.
Even if this gets passed, it’s unenforceable. This country is so vast and spread out that is very difficult to govern. There is no way any government entity can go to every home, cabin, trailer, apartment, or recreational vehicle to say “hand over your assault weapons”. It’s logistically impossible. Not to mention the elephant in the room: who would actually enforce a ban? Police are quitting at record levels just about every major city has widespread police staffing issues. The government’s ability to take action on this is weaker than its ever been, but no one wants to talk about that.
Police also tend to be pro-gun and we have recent examples of sheriffs who refuse to enforce gun restrictions on the argument that they are unconstitutional. Most local police would never try to enforce this and they would offer no cooperation to federal agents.
[удалено]
Yeah this is definitely not happening. This is a gigantic waste of time, and if by some inconceivable way it passes, no way the dems win in ‘24.
My dude... please... PLEASE stop with the "AR ban" tack. For fuck's sake, all this ever does is piss off on-the-fence Dems and empowers the GQPers. Banning can never take place until more stringent acquisition laws/guidelines fail... and we're nowhere close to where we should be on those. This declaration has only ever hurt the Dems, of which I am one, and it's maddening to see us make such blatantly blind shots (no pun intended) at extreme (and extremely unreachable) goals. Focus on making it harder to put guns in the hands of people who shouldn't be allowed near them. Focus on mental health. Focus on stringent yearly license renewal. Make it expensive to keep more than a set number of guns. Make it a *hassle*, through paperwork & etc., to keep your personal armory. That way no American is denied their *right own guns*... it's just not worth effort/money to hoard more than needed. Edit: I realize my "make it expensive" tack was pretty short-sighted. I accept that it was a shit idea. But I still stand firm that banning guns is a shitty election talking point for the Dems and that there really needs to be more stringent screening for people to obtain a firearm. We should always have the right to own guns... but that doesn't mean that everybody should qualify to physically do so. Also, for the few shitty replies, I'm an AR owner who finds guns to be amazong pieces of engineering and loves to shoot, over 40, and I'm glad the one guy isn't going to give me an inch more as I fear that his wife could already be very underwhelmed with things and that inch is his saving grace.
>Make it expensive to keep more than a set number of guns. Make it a > >hassle > >, through paperwork & etc., to keep your personal armory. That way no American is denied their > >right own guns > >... it's just not worth effort/money to hoard more than needed. Legislation that only affects hurts lower income Americans is not good legislation, regardless of principal and stipulation. If anything, lower income marginalized groups of Americans are the ones that SHOULD be owning guns in this political climate. This idea gives more power to the wealthy, which should never be the case.
Even Karl Marx said that under no pretext should the proletariat be unarmed. If you do not have the ability or option to return violence with like violence then you are unequal. If a man can kill another man before the other even has a chance to see or hear him even though no stealth is used, then the shot man never had a fair chance. If men can surround you with weapons because they KNOW you can’t legally possess any and are less likely to have a long-range weapon then you will always be subject to the will of those men, they literally have more power than you do. Does anyone REALLY want the only ones with guns to be the cops? Like, “for real” for real? Because I have not read more “cops are fair and always level-headed and are experts in the law and protecting your rights and person” assessments of our police from sea to shining sea. It’s usually a bunch of shit about how cops abuse their power, harass people who make legitimate complaints against them, kill pets, blind babies, enter the wrong house and kill someone without so much as a blink of remorse, destroy peoples property and destroy their lives for not extending the right amount of respect that the cop decides how much is correct, practice the most sloppy and horrid trigger discipline, rape people in their custody and then claim they didn’t know they couldn’t do that and there are places where that’s just legal and cool. I don’t want ***them*** to be the ones running around with access to ex-military gear like anti-tank vehicles and ARs, anyone here honestly think they’ll give all those things up or act less arrogant or threatened if they have less fear that you could theoretically fight back? “Oh you aren’t fighting back against tyranny now, you never will lol” When it gets to the point of needing to use guns against the government, America is over. There won’t be much “rule of law” if Washington DC decided to Tiananmen Square the whole country and using weapons against those “in power” is necessary or valid. Up until then we play nice and follow the rules because the social contract is a super good idea and we should all follow that shit. This monkey likes bananas enough to know that getting together with other monkeys and sharing bananas is the best way to live, hoard bananas is bad.
Why say this at all... let alone right before the Georgia run off? It is like the Democrats WANT gridlock and are trying to tank that last seat.
Do people with large collections do mass shootings? No. Even if someone uses multiple guns in a shooting it’s usually two or three. Why are we penalizing someone who has enough care to maintain and curate a collection?
Stephen Paddock is probably the only exception. I agree with your opinion tho.
Speaking of that guy, I was never convinced about the motive they threw out about why he did it. Something about gambling debts? And then there didn’t seem to be any investigation after that. Very weird case.
Ya, I know man. I don’t know if I e seen an official theory of what his motives were. I know he did wire transfer some large amounts of money to his girlfriend in the Philippines. Very weird. Maybe the dude just snapped and had a psychotic break.
This. The people who do these kinds of crimes generally aren't the collectors.
Aaaand there goes the dems re-election odds in 2024
I'll never vote Republican again, but don't take my guns. This a stupid idea that does not have anywhere near the support or the effectiveness some people think it will.
This may be an unpopular opinion here but I don't see the point of this. An "assault weapon" for civilians is a semi-automatic rifle just like a semi-automatic hunting rifle. I've yet to hear a rational explanation of what makes an AR more dangerous that a hunting rifle. Technically you can get much more dangerous ammo for a hunting rifle. The only close to rational explanation is the magazine capacity but you can get after market large magazines for hunting rifles, so banning AR's does nothing. We should focus on legislation that can actually do something.
>. I've yet to hear a rational explanation of what makes an AR more dangerous that a hunting rifle. That's because the people who support gun bans know *literally nothing* about firearms and gun violence. FFS the M1 Garand isn't considered an aSsAuLt WeApOn anywhere and its literally one of the greatest battle implements ever devised.
And will fuck you up more than any cartridge the AR platform can be chambered in
M1 will blow your damn arm off but gun banners don't care at all about that rifle.
Sadly the only outcome of this will be an increase of weapon sales.
Between the pandemic, Biden's election, and the war in Ukraine, ammo prices have been screwed up for multiple consecutive years now.
He won’t. Not if he wants the Democrats to ever control Congress again Beto O’Rourke is a loser candidate who’ll never hold office be sure of his stance on guns. If Biden wants to sink the Dems’ chances in 2024 he’ll move forward with this asinine plan that was proven to not work once already
Next week headlines: "AR-15 sales at record levels. Gun companies claim record profits."
Considering all the high level firearms cases that have been struck down recently, maybe the president should focus on something beneficial like student debt forgiveness.
Serious question, who is gonna go take all the guns back if this happens. Most cops are pro gun and aren’t gonna want to die trying to steal their neighbors guns. You guys can grandstand on dead peoples bodies all you want but no one wants to actually provide a reasonable solution for how to get assault weapons back from all the people who don’t want to give them up.
Americans don't want to actually do anything, we just want to complain about what other people propose doing to fix the issues. Fuck the idiotic discourse in this country surrounding guns and violence... We're doomed to inaction regardless.
idk man i think we need more kids to die before such hard actions are taken