150 Weapons

[sirs]

The legislation strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and state bans by:

Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test.
 
(The bill also makes the ban harder to evade by eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test.)

http://www.ibtimes.com/dianne-feinstein-gun-bill-text-list-guns-banned-details-assault-weapons-ban-2013-1037402
So we are going to loose everything with a pistol grip and , or thumbhole stock?

All cosmetic......as in looks nastier, more sinister.  Doesn't change the function of the firearm, in any way shape or form, than those not on the libs' ban list.  1 pull, 1 round

[Plane]

Assault Weapon Bans Have Been Proven to Be Effective

The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was effective at reducing crime and getting these military-style weapons off our streets. Since the ban expired, more than 350 people have been killed and more than 450 injured by these weapons.

http://www.ibtimes.com/dianne-feinstein-gun-bill-text-list-guns-banned-details-assault-weapons-ban-2013-1037402

This is a rate that compares well with other rare types of injury, it is more than American Shark bites , less than lightning strikes.

But are all of these injurys and killings fairly counted as people who could not have been injured by other weapons?

This proposed law will be very irritating and slightly effective.

The greatest historical effect is that in the period that the public is under the threat of the immanant passage of this law, the people are stocking up as much as they can possibly afford.


So.......

I propose that sports cars and pickup trucks be added to the ban.

Not only are these vehickles responsible for many more deaths than are assault weapons , but in the time that people are in fear of the coming ban, the increase in business will rebuild Detroit to its greatest glory ever!

[Christians4LessGvt]

[sirs]

You'll have to point out what bogus facts those would be, and how they are "bogus".  Your say so, just doesn't cut it, I'm afraid

Found yet another inability to back up an "obvious" erroneous claim