SB 107-03: Federal Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Full Repeal Act (Passed)

[Mr. Reactionary]

If Lincoln gets to pass stricter gun control the south should be allowed to pass looser gun restrictions including permitting ownership of these extremely common tools. A federal ban encroaches on our regional rights which according to AG Truman is commie fascism.

This bill would also end the ridiculous prohibition making tens of millions of us federal criminals. That anyone can claim to be for criminal reform while supporting this stupid monstrosity that again made TENS OF MILLIONS OF ATLASIANS federal criminals overnight is absurd.

[Mr. Reactionary]

I support this

The bill as proposed seems to go against the ideals of a communist party like the one you help run, as it would expand a private sector industry and thus not contribute to the centralization of the economy. Isn't supporting this bill going against what your supporters want?

"Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempts to disarm the people must be stopped, by force if necessary" - Karl Marx

[Mr. Reactionary]

First and foremost, unless another Senator seconds S019’s motion, there is nothing to act on. Second, for those who so vigorously defend this law, could you present evidence or explain how it has saved lives?

While an inactive GM department has prevented us from having precise figures on how many lives this ban has saved, we know that a similar RL Bill, the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, saved countless lives and created a disaster of mass shootings when it was allowed to expire. See:

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/dem/releases/studies-gun-massacre-deaths-dropped-during-assault-weapons-ban-increased-after-expiration
https://law.stanford.edu/2019/10/15/the-assault-weapon-ban-saved-lives/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/24/bidens-claim-that-1994-assault-weapons-law-brought-down-mass-shootings/
https://www.npr.org/2021/03/28/982035019/the-u-s-has-restricted-assault-style-weapons-before-did-it-work

Thus we can logically infer that the Atlasian Ban is having a similar positive effect on preserving life.

Given that there are 10s of millions of such guns in private ownership already and there are fewer than 400 deaths by rifle per year the claim that this saves "countless lives" is specious at best. According to the GM there were 12 million privately owned AR15s alone in 2019. So conservatively there are over 20 million privately owned "assault weapons" in Atlasia. If we round up to 400 rifle deaths and assume every single rifle death is from an assault weapon (unlikely) that means there is 1 murder per 50,000 assault weapons so you would need 50,000 surrendered assault weapons to decrease the murder rate by a single person (and thats assuming criminals turn in their rifles at the same rate as law abiding citizens). When New Jersey required the surrender of bump stocks in 2018 ZERO were surrendered. There is no gun registry in Atlasia so surrender would have to be voluntary. So again the idea that this has saved any lives, let alone "countless" is an absolute joke.

 https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=316056.msg6717396#msg6717396

[Mr. Reactionary]

First and foremost, unless another Senator seconds S019’s motion, there is nothing to act on. Second, for those who so vigorously defend this law, could you present evidence or explain how it has saved lives?

While an inactive GM department has prevented us from having precise figures on how many lives this ban has saved, we know that a similar RL Bill, the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, saved countless lives and created a disaster of mass shootings when it was allowed to expire. See:

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/dem/releases/studies-gun-massacre-deaths-dropped-during-assault-weapons-ban-increased-after-expiration
https://law.stanford.edu/2019/10/15/the-assault-weapon-ban-saved-lives/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/24/bidens-claim-that-1994-assault-weapons-law-brought-down-mass-shootings/
https://www.npr.org/2021/03/28/982035019/the-u-s-has-restricted-assault-style-weapons-before-did-it-work

Thus we can logically infer that the Atlasian Ban is having a similar positive effect on preserving life.

Given that there are 10s of millions of such guns in private ownership already and there are fewer than 400 deaths by rifle per year the claim that this saves "countless lives" is specious at best. According to the GM there were 12 million privately owned AR15s alone in 2019. So conservatively there are over 20 million privately owned "assault weapons" in Atlasia. If we round up to 400 rifle deaths and assume every single rifle death is from an assault weapon (unlikely) that means there is 1 murder per 50,000 assault weapons so you would need 50,000 surrendered assault weapons to decrease the murder rate by a single person (and thats assuming criminals turn in their rifles at the same rate as law abiding citizens). When New Jersey required the surrender of bump stocks in 2018 ZERO were surrendered. There is no gun registry in Atlasia so surrender would have to be voluntary. So again the idea that this has saved any lives, let alone "countless" is an absolute joke.

 https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=316056.msg6717396#msg6717396

Even if your maths is correct, I would say some people not being allowed to buy a certain type of gun (they can still buy other types) is a cost worth it even if 'only' 400 are saved. Ask the families of victims of assault weapons what they would choose, their family member back or some people having access to a certain type of weapon which is very dangerous. I would prioritize their opinion. They - and this includes a constituent who privately contaced me and asked me to oppose this repeal, who told me they know people who died from assault weapon violence - should not have to pay the cost of such dangerous weapons being truly available. It is my duty to serve the constituent I speak of, as well as many others, and make sure that what happened to that constituent doesn't happen to even more. And if surrender is voluntary, this bill still goes in the right direction since no new assault weapons will be sold. I'd like to finally address your point about a gun registry - perhaps we should have one. Not only would it have benefits in and of itself, it would also allow other measures, like the ban we speak of, to be more effective. If the registry doesn't exist and makes other laws less practiceable, the solution isn't to repeal the laws - it's to create a registry.

Close to 100,000 Atlasians die annually from alcohol related causes. If trampling on the God given rights of Atlasians just to maybe save 400 lives is worth it, I think you are making a mockery of death by not focusing on the real killer and prohibiting alcohol. Around 38,000 Atlasians die each year from car accidents. More than 3,500 Atlasians die per year from swimmimg pools and the same goes for the flu, 9X as many as from rifles. Again you are making a mockery of these deaths by not consistently applying your logic and banning cars and swimming pools or mandating flu shots. Hell over 200 Atlasians die each year from huffing glue. Might as well ban that too to save lives. More than 300 Atlasians are murdered by illegal immigrants each year. That is a significantly higher per capita death rate than from rifles. Will the deportations start? Or is this just a hypocritical case of "muh I hatez icky gunz so if it saves even 1 life its worth it but OMG I likez the other things so we cant ban them despite killing more people than icky gunz because only I getz to decide what is good and bad..."?

Also, there are over 350 million unregistered guns in private hands. How do you expect to create a registry? Go door to door? Hire tens of thousands of new ATF agents at a cost of over 2 billion dollars annually? You are advocating for making 10s of millions of Atlasians federal criminals and greatly increasing the risk of police shoot outs. All for Atlasians merely exercising a constitutionally protected, God given right. Whats next, a registry of everyone who has ever signed a petition or invoked their right against self incrimination? Frankly even suggesting such an evil policy should be an impeachable act.

[Mr. Reactionary]

I support this

The bill as proposed seems to go against the ideals of a communist party like the one you help run, as it would expand a private sector industry and thus not contribute to the centralization of the economy. Isn't supporting this bill going against what your supporters want?

What is your response to Marx's quote?

I suppose it is a matter of priorities, but personally I think that saving countless lives is a far more important matter than providing arms for the populace, and while I don't personally support economic centralization, if I did, I would not carve out an exception for expanding the right to bear arms, as all that does is endanger the very population that we all want to preserve.

Every time you falsely claim "countless lives" are saved Im going to remind everyone that your claim is a lie. Plus if the murder rate from rifles has gone down in the last few years despite the number of legally owned machine guns more than tripling in that time, that suggests its not the result of gun bans.

[Mr. Reactionary]

a.) Car accidents are inevitible unless you want to ban cars

Gun murders are inevitable unless you want to go door to door rounding up 350 million guns. How can you so coldly ignore the almost 100,000 Atlasians dying every year? That does not comport with your "logic".

b.) Alcohol related deaths are inherently the fault of the drinker, not the fault of someone else, so unless you are suggesting that those who die of gun violence are somehow responsible for their death, I don't see how a comparison works.

Drunk drivers kill other people. Alcoholism is a disease. 80% of gun deaths are 1. Suicide 2. Gangs 3. Law enforcement caused. That means 80% of gun deaths do bear some resposibility. If anything the comparison makes your "logic" seem more illogical.

c.) Same thing from b.) applies to swimming pools.

So if a baby drowns in a pool its the baby's fault? Impecable "logic".

d.) Similar logic to b.); people can choose to get vaccinated against the flu (and yes, I do support mandating the COVID19 vaccine but that's not what's being debated and addressed here and in this bill, so not sure how relevant it is right now)

Unvaccinated flu spreaders kill lots of olds. Again the idea that only guns and literally nothing else have externalities that statistically result in the deaths of others is not rooted in fact or "logic".

e.) It isn't a criminal registry, so let's make that very clear to begin with. It's just a way to track all guns, and it wouldn't be publicly accessible, hypothetically.

And when I dont register my guns am I a criminal?

f.) Sorry you feel that way. Luckily, you don't unilateraly decide who gets impeached and the overall Senate isn't as reactionary as you are (as your username is a clear indicator).

Id rather be a reactionary that someone tyrannically supporting the imprisonment of 20 million atlasians to "save" maybe 400 all while violating my oath of office to protect the Atlasian Constitution. If you really cared about Atlasians dying youd target the myriad of activities that kill many, many times more people than skerry boombooms. You just want to ban guns because you dislike them, not because you have some "logical" principle on protecting human life. Why is the life of a shooting victim worth more than the life of someone killed by another driver? Oh, because you personally use cars but dont use guns. Screw the 38,000 car accident victims and screw the 20 million assault weapon owners.

[Mr. Reactionary]

a.) Car accidents are inevitible unless you want to ban cars

Gun murders are inevitable unless you want to go door to door rounding up 350 million guns. How can you so coldly ignore the almost 100,000 Atlasians dying every year? That does not comport with your "logic".

b.) Alcohol related deaths are inherently the fault of the drinker, not the fault of someone else, so unless you are suggesting that those who die of gun violence are somehow responsible for their death, I don't see how a comparison works.

Drunk drivers kill other people. Alcoholism is a disease. 80% of gun deaths are 1. Suicide 2. Gangs 3. Law enforcement caused. That means 80% of gun deaths do bear some resposibility. If anything the comparison makes your "logic" seem more illogical.

c.) Same thing from b.) applies to swimming pools.

So if a baby drowns in a pool its the baby's fault? Impecable "logic".

d.) Similar logic to b.); people can choose to get vaccinated against the flu (and yes, I do support mandating the COVID19 vaccine but that's not what's being debated and addressed here and in this bill, so not sure how relevant it is right now)

Unvaccinated flu spreaders kill lots of olds. Again the idea that only guns and literally nothing else have externalities that statistically result in the deaths of others is not rooted in fact or "logic".

e.) It isn't a criminal registry, so let's make that very clear to begin with. It's just a way to track all guns, and it wouldn't be publicly accessible, hypothetically.

And when I dont register my guns am I a criminal?

f.) Sorry you feel that way. Luckily, you don't unilateraly decide who gets impeached and the overall Senate isn't as reactionary as you are (as your username is a clear indicator).

Id rather be a reactionary that someone tyrannically supporting the imprisonment of 20 million atlasians to "save" maybe 400 all while violating my oath of office to protect the Atlasian Constitution. If you really cared about Atlasians dying youd target the myriad of activities that kill many, many times more people than skerry boombooms. You just want to ban guns because you dislike them, not because you have some "logical" principle on protecting human life. Why is the life of a shooting victim worth more than the life of someone killed by another driver? Oh, because you personally use cars but dont use guns. Screw the 38,000 car accident victims and screw the 20 million assault weapon owners.

Since you have made clearly unintelligent and illogical statements, and will not be moved to oppose the repeal, I'm not going to further engage with you (other senators have privately adivsed me to do this as well).

You literally just did in the middle of a vote.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Current text:

AN ACT
To repeal the Federal Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act in its entirety.

Be it enacted by the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia assembled

Section 1. Title

1. This act may be cited as the Federal Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Full Repeal Act.

Section 2. Definitions

2. All sections of the Federal Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act are hereby repealed in their entirety, effective immediately.

3. The categories of weapons set out in the repealed legislation shall subsequently be regulated under the National Firearms Act.

How is this the current text? I thought we struck this sh**t down.

If this is the current text, I object

Introduce an amendment removing it and make sure MB OSR and Yankee vote this time.

That would definitely have a huge fiscal impact and require increasing ATF 10 fold.

[Mr. Reactionary]

It's also disappointing that the President and the honorable PPT are not willing to work against this dangerous amendment, instead, making only meager efforts to secure the right to bear arms.

We theoretically have the pro-gun votes to pass a clean repeal.

Also, despite Senator Pericles' refusal to pursue delaying this bill, the government still stands in favor of a partisan power grab when it comes to the Senate rules. All together, this turn of events has been deeply, deeply disappointing and should be thought thoroughly about by undecided or swingable voters in the upcoming federal elections and by pro-gun voters of all political stripes.

Dont worry. President Scott has redraft powers. If this passes he can send the bill back with the fascist part stricken out and then yall just revote to ratify the version as presented by President Scott with no opportunities for sneaky amendments.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Nay.

Shame how little one's word mean in the Senate these days.

Who are you calling a liar? Thats a pretty serious charge to level. Surely you have a statement and speaker in mind to make an inflammatory statement like that so let us know who told you what lie. Considering Pericles' amendment secretly added hundreds of millions of dollars in unfunded spending obligations without a single word of debate surely you arent directing this claim at the President who has bravely and heroically stood up for individual rights and good governance?

[Mr. Reactionary]

Nay.

Shame how little one's word mean in the Senate these days.

Who are you calling a liar? Thats a pretty serious charge to level. Surely you have a statement and speaker in mind to make an inflammatory statement like that so let us know who told you what lie. Considering Pericles' amendment secretly added hundreds of millions of dollars in unfunded spending obligations without a single word of debate surely you arent directing this claim at the President who has bravely and heroically stood up for individual rights and good governance?

Bleh, I don't feel like disclosing that to you. Just feeling passive-aggressive from getting played like a violin.

Lol OK. Seems odd to feel like you "got played" when all public discussion in this thread suggests the votes to repeal this cleanly have always been present and were never in your favor. Getting passive aggressive over presumably super secret threats to the President that arent reflected in this record is odd. The legislative process should be public and open. Its chilling to think substantial policy changes are being negotiated secretly outside of the public eye.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Nay.

Shame how little one's word mean in the Senate these days.

Who are you calling a liar? Thats a pretty serious charge to level. Surely you have a statement and speaker in mind to make an inflammatory statement like that so let us know who told you what lie. Considering Pericles' amendment secretly added hundreds of millions of dollars in unfunded spending obligations without a single word of debate surely you arent directing this claim at the President who has bravely and heroically stood up for individual rights and good governance?

Bleh, I don't feel like disclosing that to you. Just feeling passive-aggressive from getting played like a violin.

You'll be held hostage until you fess up who that person is.

Your mother. Or your sister - I can’t remember which one I had intercourse with the other night.

If you can't remember the difference between a menopausal woman and a 9 year old girl you may need to see a doctor.