TYR Tactical

Democrats Are After Your Guns Again – The Assault Weapons Ban Of 2015

Never mind that they tried this once before and it not only didn’t work but cost them a majority in the Congress. Never mind that prohibitions don’t work. Never mind that the majority of Americans don’t want this. Democrats in the House of Representatives  have introduced a new bill to make the guns many SSD readers own, illegal to manufacture.  Naturally, the bill also covers ‘large capacity ammunition feeding devices’.

One of the things that always strikes me about these bills as they pop up is the obsession the anti-2Aers have with guns.  They love to make lists of types of firearms, the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’.  It’s really kind of creepy.  If only they put that kind of effort into cutting red tape so businesses could create jobs.  

I encourage you to read the full text of this bill that is currently in committee.


57 Responses to “Democrats Are After Your Guns Again – The Assault Weapons Ban Of 2015”

  1. Washington says:

    “cutting red tape so businesses could create jobs” lmao. so simple! why hadn’t anyone thought of that before?

  2. Eagleeastcoast says:

    A study needs to be done on how many Americans would be out of work if this ban went into effect. How many makers would be forced to shut down as their customer base would be destroyed.

    • PETE says:

      I can think of thousands of jobs lost in blue and purple states if this blanket ban is improved. There is also a very real preparedness cost to defense R&D and surge capacity for small arms that is effectively underwritten by US consumers (and foreign Airsofters). In other words, this is just another compromise of our common defense, which seems to be a continuing theme for the Democratic Party.

    • Douche Poser says:

      Jobs that can be found or changed, vs lives?

      I don’t support that ban, but tbh that’s a moot point.

  3. PETE says:

    My read is this could also ban all Glocks and M1911s due to this clause “A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.”

    Classy as ever.

  4. Jack says:

    We must live in a utopia for them to ignore all the other problems that our country is facing and go right after our constitutional rights.

    Delusional. Simply Delusional.

    • Douche Poser says:

      The fact that it’s in the constitution doesn’t mean it can’t be touched. A constitution is not immutable. That’s what amendments are for.

  5. Contractor says:

    Cant have thought policing and no confiscations.

  6. jellydonut says:

    Are they ever going to grow a brain and do something productive with their lives?

  7. Terry B. says:

    Since there is no chance of this Bill passing the House it looks like just another exercise in political theater.

    In other words giving the appearance of doing something while knowing full well you are actually doing nothing.


    • SSD says:

      Always be watchful of amendments to bills that are too big to fail.

    • Griffin says:

      Kinda like the last 8 years of republican theater… at least this demorat bullshit wont cost millions of dollars like bogus Benghazi hearings or trying to repeal the ACA……….

      • Contractor says:

        Yes, who cares when contractors get killed. 🙂

        • Steven S says:

          Not to mention that Hilary and the State Department lied to the American people on what started the incident. Oh yeah, let’s not forget the lack of people who were held responsible. *COUGH* Patrick Kennedy *COUGH* (That’s just one name).

          • Griffin says:

            honestly if the republicans didn’t vote against embassy security funding it would have cost less than all the congressional hearings to only find out it was a bullshit witch hunt all along….

            • Thomas 67 says:

              “Blaming Benghazi on Budget Cuts” – Rebuttal. the budget for which went from $1.18 billion in 2008 (out of about $35 billion for the State Department and “other international programs”) to $1.59 billion in 2010 (out of about $52) before dropping to just under $1.5 billion in 2011. reason.com/blog 2012/10/12 blaming-benghazi-on-budget-cuts

              “Documents Back Up Claims of Requests for Greater Security in Benghazi.” Issa and Chaffetz say they’ve “been told repeatedly” that the Obama administration not only “repeatedly reject(ed) requests for increased security despite escalating violence, but it also systematically decreased existing security to dangerous and ineffective levels,” and did so “to effectuate a policy of ‘normalization’ in Libya after the conclusion of its civil war.”

              abcnews.go.com blogs/politics 2012/10 documents-back-up-claims-of-requests-for-greater-security-in-benghazi

      • Thomas 67 says:

        It’s obvious that you are a loyal democrat whose only reply to a posting talking about the current anti-2nd Amendment efforts by the democrats …. is to bash the republicans for opposing 0bama.

        If you have anything of substance to offer, please do so. Otherwise you can return to the huffington post where you can totally immerse youself in the liberal echo chamber. Both sites will be so much better off if you would.

      • fedupu says:

        it has has 123 Republican cosponsors, I dont trust any of them and they are all full of crap.. Look at the link and read up on the bill real good and you will have reason to be scared.. there is an alarming # of supporters on both sides of the isle.. They are in Washington and there money and power rely on each other not on us..

        • SSD says:

          What are you talking about?

          • Rob Collins says:

            Yeah, what are you talking about? I searched your link for Republican co-sponsors, looking for “[R-” and found exactly none…

        • tazman66gt says:

          Did you get lost and think that Rep. meant Republican? Rep, means Representative. If you look at the end it says in () D and the State and Region they represent.

  8. P.J. says:

    While I would rate the odds of this passing as slightly lower than the odds that Hilary is held accountable over the email servers/Benghazi, I appreciate SSD posting this. The community needs reminders that if you think gun rights are important then the Democratic Party is not for you.

  9. Joe F says:

    This bill won’t make it out of the House.
    Sometimes I think these people are getting paid by the NRA to help raise prices and demand. The last 8 years have been the best time in history for private weapon and ammunition sales.

  10. Dellis says:

    I pray my future forecast is merely a horrible and misplaced, “What if?”

    If we have another “Obama” take the next office I fully feel that this will set in motion a view of our Constitution from the uber liberal and militant left (including media) as old and archaic. Not at all representing a new and more progressive liberal mindset that we wish to present to an ever changing world. I see signs of this already when college kids are asked to sign a petition to do away with free speech, ala “First Amendment”. Scary thing is they sign it not grasping the contradictory nature of it all, by one using their “free speech” to do away with “free speech”! Irony here is I never went to college and I can see the stupidity of these kids.


    The rights of “We the people” will slowly be chipped away at until we ask one day, “When the hell did that happen?!”

    This will almost 100% fail…..this time BUT will it always fail? That’s the question I ponder and fear.

    • Griffin says:

      the irony is conservatives are just as stupid, except most liberals dont waste time on stupid ploy videos and more time on fixing the actual world…

      • Chuck says:

        “Liberals fixing the world”…Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
        I’ve been to many places in the world and the ones who actually fix things are those in the middle that understand the meaning of “compromise”. The all or nothing attitudes on both sides of the pendulum are the issue. This doesn’t mean there is a middle ground for everything, but it does mean there is a give and take across issuse. For example: We accept the need for background checks (seems logical enough) and in return no more wide spread bans get brought up except for things like a Stinger (again seems logical). I know this is a fantasy…but so is this magical utopia where human kind has evolved into a nonviolant stage

        • wb says:

          This. A thousand time this.

          Intelligent solutions come not from steadfast iron-clad inflexibility, but from thoughtful empathy, engagement… and manipulation. One cannot win an argument if the opposition’s perspective and concerns are not understood. Without this, it is just a shouting match.

          Everyone on this forum understands the fallacy of this bill.
          According to 2014 FBI data more people were killed with “hands, fists, feet, etc” than with rifles.

          Statistically, rifle deaths are insignificant. So when they want these bans against terrible awful, baby-seeking uzi rifles… ask them what they’re afraid of. Obviously there are some leading characters in public eye who just want this bill because they want it.

          But everyone else? our family, friends, co-workers etc who can’t imagine why these bills don’t simply sail through congress? Ask them, engage them.
          Without their support, these polls and perceptions will fall, the bills will be seen for the security theater they are, and we can move forward with the bigger problems in life.

          What are the leading causes of death? Lets all agree to address the top reasons. Medical issues, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, car accidents, overdose…

          but nah, F*ck that, thats just too reasonable and requires way too much self control.

          • Bill says:

            Yeah, what they said. Us vs them works best in cage fights, not resolving social and political problems.

        • james says:

          Compromise doesn’t worjk where you are having rights taken away. Once you accept that your rights can be abridged and allow it they are steadily eroded until you have none. You are an idiot if you think they care about expanded background checks, assault weapon bans,hate speech legislation, or any other attempt to limit a fundamental right. Those are just what they feel they can get by with now. The incremental implementation allows them time to gain the acceptance that this type of thing is legitimate,then they move to the next step. If they pass something like this in 30-40 years it will be such an accepted part of life( just like going to an FFL to by a gun after a background check or sending in a form1 in order to cut a barrel is today) that gun owners will actually defend it just like you are doing now.

      • Dellis says:

        Get coal in your stocking….again?

        Liberal politicians have no clue on how to “fix” anything because that means they would be out of a job. Is it just liberals? Hell no, the vast majority of politicians do not care what happens until election or re-election time. They will do anything, say anything to stay in that cushy position, get that fantastic retirement program and live high.

        How many asshat liberal politicians spew nonsense about immigrants and how they should be allowed to come in to our country? How many of them want these immigrants living next door to them? How many Syrian refugees has Obama taken in or will take in?

        So the gun laws do NOT NEED TO BE FIXED! As noted already it’s reasonable to not allow people to have an RPG or stinger nor arm their front yard with claymore. But to say we can “fix” what has been working fine for the last 200 years is sheer stupidity. Our forefathers would not recognize this America, in fact I’d like to see what they would do given a year back in office.

  11. Bushman says:

    Making lists and classifications with no connection with real life is a well-known symptom of schizophrenia and several other mental disorders.

  12. Ray DiLorenzo says:

    “When the people fear the government, you have tyranny; when the government fears the people, you have liberty.” John Adams
    Make your choice!

  13. K says:

    I’d love to know exactly how many man-hours were spent compiling the list of exempt and non exempt firearms. Thats literally taxpayer money wasted for months and months of work to locate and list all of those firearms. We paid for that nonsense, that we all know will positively not make it out the house. Such wasteful spending.

    • Griffin says:

      Far less than the millions spent trying to repeal the ACA which had zero chance of ever passing…..

      • PETE says:

        For the record, the Accountable Care Act was passed after an election that repudiated the Democratic Party agenda… Dozens of those voting for the ACA had already been fired by their constituents. The House members voting for the bill did so against the will of the people as expressed only weeks before. To be charitable, the results of the ACA have been financially a disaster indicating the entire process was doomed to fail as the Opposition stated.

        The Republican House was elected in opposition to the ACA, even before the final vote was taken. It is disingenuous to suggest that a repeal is some how wrong… It is politicians, duly elected, trying to fulfill their campaign promises. What kind of bizarro world is it where we do not expect people to do what they promised they would do?

        Why does this matter? Elections have consequences and zombie bills may eventually become law. The recent cybersecurity bill took four years to pass (two separate Congresses).

        • z0phi3l says:

          You can’t use logic, reason or facts with these Libtards, it’s too complex for their simple brains, you’re gonna have to explain it to him like he’s in kindergarten, he may then understand you, but I fear liberalism has completely eroded his remaining brain functions

      • arche says:

        Millions? A progressive lib whining about millions?…HA! Take a look at the debt brother, you Democrats leaped billions like it was mere inconvenience and went straight for the trillions. Health care is serious but ACA is a poor solution that should be abolished and I will never fault Republicans for trying to get rid of bad policy. If you take a look at the Democratic party’s strategy these days it boils down pretty simply to the following: vote in any and every type of free handout we can so the Republicans look bad when they vote to take it away…add in millions of illegals and you have a recipe for national control and the ultimate goal of American Socialism. I think Democrats don’t understand guns, don’t understand war and don’t understand leadership because they [generally] don’t serve in combat units. I say generally because there are a few (though I suspect some of them play the “enlightened warrior artist” just to sway the ladies, which is a completely legit ploy if you are successful) they are about as common as hardcore Republicans working in the Forest Service. I agree with you that the drama over Benghazi has been unsuccessful but the reason is that roughly half of the country has absolutely no problem electing Presidents who are liars and horribly inexperienced leaders (e.g. Obama). My guess is that you, like most of your ilk, simply will never understand the following sentence: Hillary was responsible for Benghazi because she was the leader when shit went down. “Leader” is the key word here, look it up and you might learn something. She never took responsibility and she jokes around when she’s being investigated. She’s no leader.

  14. Kaos-1 says:

    Seems like all they ever do is “copy and paste” the 1994 assault weapons ban. Nothing new , same old shit.

    • TM says:

      Isn’t the rocket launcher provision new? They’re really keeping up with the times… you know, the proliferation of semiauto rifles with integral rocket launchers… gotta keep those off the streets!

    • mark says:

      It’s actually much stricter than the 1994 ban. The 94 ban had two “evil features,” while this ban has only one. Under the 1994 ban you could have an AR with a fixed stock; under this ban all semi autos with a pistol grip would be banned.

      The Shotgun section is also more restrictive, banning detachable mags and semi auto fixed mags over 5 rounds.

      Most tellingly of all, the entire class of “exempt” weapons does not include a single pistol.

  15. Mike says:

    Of course…. Why wouldn’t they?

    Which is the easier fix, going after: broken homes, mental illnesses, economic hardship, indoctrination of violence in the youth, etc. etc.


    You could go after a tangible object and declare a visible victory to the uneducated voting mass you pander to?

    We’ve elected a body of lethargic invertebrates to represent us. They’ve lost sight of the people and any commonality they share with us. They won’t fight to make things better for their constituents… They’re fighting for votes. Now think what you want, but we’ve allowed this to happen to us.

  16. MThomas says:

    My Ford is made by Mazda, My bass guitar is made in Indonesia, My amp was assembled in the states from parts made in some foreign country, my high end boots are all made in china or mexico or korea or Bangladesh with the rest of my clothes. my levis aren’t made in the USA anymore.
    My semi automatic M-16 with a shit ton of high capacity banana clips was made in the USA by my made in the USA son, who was the honor Graduate at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. My .45 automatic was made in Arizona and all my super high quality clips for it were made in Berryville Arkansas. all my pouches to carry my banana clips were made in Tacoma Washington.
    The firearms industry is practically the last things that are American made. So lets get all politically correct and do away with that too since all these “everyone gets a trophy and a juice box skinny pants hipsters and their moms” can unbunch their panties and get the facebook police to protect them from the bad mens.

  17. Joe says:

    How about we ban uneducated thought? Or mindless spending? Or Marxism? What if we ban alcohol to reduce the number of alcohol related deaths? Maybe we should enact a waiting period for the purchase and possession of a vehicle that can carry more than 4 passengers, or travel at speeds in excess of 55mph? Let’s ban ISIS!!? And fat! And Internet trolls! And ban books that show pictures of interesting subjects!

  18. Dev says:

    As an Australian. My only (very limited) advice is hang on to your rights tooth and nail and never ever let it go or be eroded. Once it’s gone it’ll be gone for good. That’s all I have to say.

    • Dellis says:

      That is 100% correct!

      Let’s say they would amend or take away the 2nd amendment, it’s most likely just a brain fart in some liberals foggy mind, but IF it was removed it would never be brought back in any form or fashion.

      Once freedoms are gone, they are gone

  19. SGT Rock says:

    A Supreme Court Justice flipping on the issue would also have the same effect, by re-reading the 2A. The ACA should have been deemed unconstitutional, forcing you to purchase a service from a private entity or be fined. Presto-magico, Supremes make it all good in one decision.

    • Steven S says:

      The Supreme Court has lost my trust after these 5 years, all due to decisions like that.