HB 29-22: Repeal of the Federal Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act (Passed)

[Dr. MB]

AN ACT
To maximize freedom.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Republic of Atlasia in Congress assembled,

Section I. Title

i. This bill may be known as the Repeal of the Federal Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act.

Section II. Definitions
i. The Federal Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act, passed in 2020, is repealed in its entirety.

Designation: HB 29-22
Sponsor: MB

[Talleyrand]

Can someone give a tl;dr on what the old bill did?

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

The assault weapons ban is saving lives every day. Repealing it just increases the # of mass shootings. Oppose this legislation.

[Dr. MB]

Can someone give a tl;dr on what the old bill did?

Federal Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act

SECTION I: Name and Intent

A.) This bill may be cited as the Federal Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act.

Section II: Criteria

1.) There shall be a nationwide ban on the purchasing, manufacturing, sale, or possession of assault weapons. The criteria laid out in Section 3A to shall be used to classify assault weapons.

2.) The prohibition does not apply to a firearm that is (1) manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action; (2) permanently inoperable; (3) an antique; or (4) a rifle or shotgun specifically identified by make and model.

3.) Any of the following features shall classify a firearm as an 'Assault Weapon'.

A.) Any semi automatic rifle which has a High Capacity Magazine (see Section III) which can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

B.) Any firearm which has a bayonet lug.

C.) Any firearm which has a threaded barrel.

D.) Any semi-automatic pistol with a detachable magazine in front, or outside of the pistol grip.

E.) Any semi-automatic pistol with a detachable magazine which can accept more than 15 rounds.

F.) Any semi-automatic shotgun with one or more of the following criteria; a pistol grip, a forward grip, a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

SECTION III: High Capacity Magazine Ban

A.) A large capacity ammunition feeding device is hereby classified as any device including a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, helical feeding device, or similar device, including any such device joined or coupled with another in any manner, that has an overall capacity of, or that can be readily restored, changed, or converted to accept rounds above the limits in Section 2 A, E and F.

C.) The above shall not apply to the possession of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed on or before the date of enactment of this Act.

Section IV

A.) This Act shall not apply to any firearm purchased, owned, manufactured or possessed before the enactment of this act.

B.) This Act shall not apply to any firearm purchased, owned, manufactured or possessed for law enforcement or Military purposes.

SECTION V: TIMING

1. This bill shall take effect 6 months after being enacted.

[S019]

I echo the sentiments of the Congressman Emeritus and current Lincoln Council Speaker, this honorable chamber would be making a grave mistake to repeal this law which has saved so many lives.

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

I will oppose this bill and I hope to see it fail!

[Talleyrand]

I will oppose this bill and I hope to see it fail!

I will also be opposing this bill.

[Dr. MB]

The original bill does nothing to address gun violence and instead seeks to solve the issue by doing something which is tried and true failure: banning things they don’t like. To add fuel to the fire, it makes itself pretty much totally ineffective by doing nothing about the tens of millions of so called assault weapons already on the streets. Either go all the way or don’t even bother. Any sort of criminal who wants to commit a crime with one of these weapons faces only a minor inconvenience in getting them - and if they can’t get it at all they’ll utilize other methods. Cars, trucks, many other types of gun. It’s playing whack a mole without actually doing anything to solve gun violence problems.

Add in that it’s an assault on individual freedoms, a manifestation of the nanny state, and you have just a few of the reasons why this bill never should have been passed. I’m urging a total repeal.

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Many of us would love to "go all the way" – but this bill was a compromise. Repeal would be a mistake. Does anyone want to add to this or should we just vote?

[windjammer]

The original bill does nothing to address gun violence and instead seeks to solve the issue by doing something which is tried and true failure: banning things they don’t like. To add fuel to the fire, it makes itself pretty much totally ineffective by doing nothing about the tens of millions of so called assault weapons already on the streets. Either go all the way or don’t even bother. Any sort of criminal who wants to commit a crime with one of these weapons faces only a minor inconvenience in getting them - and if they can’t get it at all they’ll utilize other methods. Cars, trucks, many other types of gun. It’s playing whack a mole without actually doing anything to solve gun violence problems.

Add in that it’s an assault on individual freedoms, a manifestation of the nanny state, and you have just a few of the reasons why this bill never should have been passed. I’m urging a total repeal.

If there are still many deaths despite this law, this is not because this bill is "useless" but because this doesn't go far enough.

I urge all members of congress to block this attempt to go backwards!

[Dr. MB]

Many of us would love to "go all the way" – but this bill was a compromise. Repeal would be a mistake. Does anyone want to add to this or should we just vote?

There's a 72 hour debate period which doesn't end until tomorrow around midnight.

[Harvey Updyke Jr🌹]

Why in Dave's name was this even introduced?

What a failure of reasoning and basic logic.

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Repealing this bill because there are fewer deaths from gun violence would be like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you aren't getting wet, to paraphrase a certain jurist. I hope my colleagues defeat this bill when the time comes

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Can someone give a tl;dr on what the old bill did?

We should seek to try and hyperlink external bill name references in bill texts for ease of access especially to those not in Congress trying to follow along.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The original bill does nothing to address gun violence and instead seeks to solve the issue by doing something which is tried and true failure: banning things they don’t like. To add fuel to the fire, it makes itself pretty much totally ineffective by doing nothing about the tens of millions of so called assault weapons already on the streets. Either go all the way or don’t even bother. Any sort of criminal who wants to commit a crime with one of these weapons faces only a minor inconvenience in getting them - and if they can’t get it at all they’ll utilize other methods. Cars, trucks, many other types of gun. It’s playing whack a mole without actually doing anything to solve gun violence problems.

Add in that it’s an assault on individual freedoms, a manifestation of the nanny state, and you have just a few of the reasons why this bill never should have been passed. I’m urging a total repeal.

If there are still many deaths despite this law, this is not because this bill is "useless" but because this doesn't go far enough.

I urge all members of congress to block this attempt to go backwards!

Things aren't always so simple Windjammer. For instance there are situations you conclude that going further only yields diminishing returns and/or going further is not worth the price paid for such in order to achieve the desired objective. Alcohol prohibition would be an example of such in practice and how it came apart in the end.

[Harvey Updyke Jr🌹]

Let's just get it over with so we can defeat this crap.

Motion for final vote.

[Dr. MB]

A final vote has started. 72 hours.

[Dr. MB]

Aye

[Saint Milei]

Aye

[lfromnj]

Aye

[Joseph Cao]

Aye.

[S019]

This is actually a joke,

[Sirius_]

Nay

[Continential]

Aye

[Dr. MB]

With a majority of representatives voting to pass this vote closes in 24 hours.