They Learned From History: The Enacted 1994 AWB And The Proposed 2019 AWB.

AWB2019-01

The listed purpose under the header for H.R.1296 reads as such, “To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.”

Read that again, “TO ENSURE THAT THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS IS NOT UNLIMITED”. The second half of the Second Amendment says, “The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Another way to define “Shall not be infringed”, is to say, “Shall not be limited”. The header purpose for AWB ’94 said, “To make unlawful the transfer or possession of assault weapons.”. Sounds like the agenda has changed. Personally, I don’t think it’s changed at all. Obviously, they have just slid the mask down.

Here are just some comparisons I’ve noted between the 1994 AWB of September 1994, and the Proposed “Feb 15, 2019 H.R.1296” Bill.

Part 1 (1994) says, “The term `semiautomatic assault weapon’ means:

  • (A) On this line they show a list of nine weapon types with lists of the manufacturers and the model names/numbers. Look it up under the link above.
  • (B) “A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least TWO of the following:
  •    (i) a folding or telescoping stock;                    `
  •    (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
  •    (iii) a bayonet mount;                    “
  •    (iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and                    “
  •    (v) a grenade launcher”
  • (C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least TWO of;                    “
  •    (i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
  •    (ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;
  •    (iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;
  •    (iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and
  •    (v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and
  • (D) a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least TWO of–                    “
  •    (i) a folding or telescoping stock;
  •    (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
  •    (iii) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and
  •    (iv) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.”.

(31) The term large capacity ammunition feeding device’—

  • (A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar
    device manufactured after the date of enactment of the Violent
    Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that has
    a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted
    to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but
  • (B) does not include an attached tubular device designed
    to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire
    ammunition.

______________________________________________________________________________

Primary Arms Blog Post11

Under the 1994 AWB this rifle with 10 round magazine was OK for sale, according to the listed criteria from that Bill. That being a rifle with detachable mag could have the threaded barrel and be “Legal”. Under this proposed 2019 AWB, this rifle would be banned for sale.

“AWB: Part Deux” (2019) says,

(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any ONE of the following:

  • (i) A pistol grip.
  • (ii) A forward grip.
  • (iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock, or is otherwise foldable or adjustable in a manner that operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability, of the weapon.
  • (iv) A grenade launcher.
  • (v) A barrel shroud.
  • (vi) A threaded barrel.

(B) A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

(C) Any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.

(D) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any ONE of the following:

  •   (i) A threaded barrel.
  •   (ii) A second pistol grip.
  •   (iii) A barrel shroud.
  •   (iv) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
  •   (v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.
  •   (vi) A manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when unloaded.
  •   (vii) A stabilizing brace or similar component.

(E) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

(F) A semiautomatic shotgun that has any ONE of the following:

  •   (i) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
  •   (ii) A pistol grip.
  •   (iii) A fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds.
  •   (iv) The ability to accept a detachable magazine.
  •   (v) A forward grip.
  •   (vi) A grenade launcher.
  • (G) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

(H) “All of the following rifles, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:”

This section goes on to list 88 different weapon types and models by manufacturer and model name/number. Here are a few of note:

  • (XIV) Colt Match Target rifles
  • (xii) Hi-Point Carbine.
  • (xv) SU–16
Primary Arms 1x Cyclops03

Under the this proposed 2019 AWB, they list the KelTec “SU-16”, with no exception for the CA (California compliant) models. It also is not listed in the exemption list of the “APPENDIX A—FIREARMS EXEMPTED BY THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN OF 2017” shown at the bottom of the 2019 BILL.

(I)”All of the following pistols, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:”

This section goes on to list 42 different pistols by manufacturer and model name/number. Here are some to note:

  • (i) All AK–47 types.
  • (II) CZ Scorpion pistol.
  • (ii) All AR–15 types.

(J) “All of the following shotguns, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:”

This section goes on to list 12 shotguns by manufacturer and model name/number. Here’s one to note:

  • (iv) All IZHMASH Saiga 12 types.

(K) All belt-fed semiautomatic firearms, including TNW M2HB and FN M2495.

(37) The term ‘large capacity ammunition feeding device’—

  • (A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, 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, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; and

      (I guess no ducktape allowed)

  • (B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

NOTE THE HIGHLIGHTED DIFFERENCE ABOVE TO THE FIRST MAGAZINE DESCRIPTION IN SECTION (31) OF THE 94 AWB.

This is what the law says right now after subsection (u),

[(v), (w) Repealed. Pub. L. 103–322, title XI, § 110105(2)Sept. 13, 1994108 Stat. 2000.]

This is what the proposed 2019 AWB would put into the law,

(a) In General.—Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by inserting after subsection (u) the following:

“(v) (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a semiautomatic assault weapon.

“(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession, sale, or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of enactment of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2019.

“(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any firearm that—

“(A) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;

“(B) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or

“(C) is an antique firearm, as defined in section 921 of this title.

________________________________________________________________________________________

My takeaway from this is that they are playin’ the “Incremental” game (imagine that), but are definitely closing the perceived gaps they had in AWB 1994. I wonder how long it’ll be till bolt guns with detachable magazines and threaded barrels, or pump action shotguns with more than 5 round tubular mags are on the banned list? What, you think there will be a “Sunset Clause” if this gets passed? Fat chance! Remember, they learned from ’94 and their proposed Bill for 2019 shows that.

I’m not aware of this Bill makin’ it out of Committee….yet, but in the climate we’ve seen in the last few weeks, it’s only a matter of time. Is there a chance they will pass this bill without modification when it’s proposed? Probably not. Don’t be fooled though, if they win in 2020, this or something similar, but probably more draconian, will be out before the swearing in is completed.

The reason I went to the effort here is to show what they desire and have publicly put ON PAPER to try and take your RIGHTS away. The fact that they would propose this is treason. The first one in ’94 was treasonous as well, but we as a People did not call them on it (Americans weren’t mad enough, maybe?). What are you gonna do if they do pass it? Bury your guns? You better get a handle on your options and your possible courses of action before we get there. In the moment is not the time to decide.

JCD

“Parata Vivere”- Live Prepared.

 

 

6 thoughts on “They Learned From History: The Enacted 1994 AWB And The Proposed 2019 AWB.

  1. Thank you Sir for spending the time on this analysis. It is appreciated.

    I’ve but one question for the gun grabbers, Where is the money? What money, why for all the new prisons required for the new 2019 AWB felons.

    700,000 v. 100,000,000 I kinda like the odds. And I’m old and cranky, with not much to look forward to, except more of their BS. They need to be reminded: They wanted this.

    Later Nephew,
    CUJOE

  2. See what they did there? Is the definition of ‘threaded barrel” limited to threading at the muzzle (i.e. supressor / flash hider friendly) or how the barrel is fixed to the action ? Because a whole lot of rifle barrels are secured via threading to the receiver.

  3. The New York SAFE Act banned assault weapons but none were surrendered. Connecticut passed a similar ban after the Sandy Hook shooting, and once again, firearms were not surrendered to the government. After the mass shooting in New Zealand, their government banned semi-automatic firearms. The Kiwis own approximately 1.5 million firearms and presumably somewhere around half of those are semi-automatic. 750 firearms were turned in to the government, probably one tenth of one percent of the banned firearms. New Zealand doesn’t have the firearms heritage and culture of the United States, and New York and Connecticut are deep blue states. If the government and its collectivist supporters can’t force a gun ban in these places, what do they think would happen if they passed a federal ban on semi-automatic firearms? In Louisiana? In Kentucky? In Texas? Are you trying to start a civil war? Because this is how you start a civil war.

  4. I believe that Yes, they ARE ‘trying to start a civil war’ as the Traitors voting on this, (and their Bankster Owners) are at all times surrounded by hired thugs with ‘assault weapons’. They also simply don’t give a damn how many of their badged thugs get Killed trying to Confiscate the peoples’ Arms.

    They are completely Unaware of the sheer Numbers of people who will “Refuse to Comply” even after the Examples set by Connecticut, New York, and New Zealand Citizens; they still believe that if only they pass the “Right Legislation” that the. People will happily ‘turn in their guns’ like good little Slaves.

    Buy More Ammo.

  5. Blog Author,

    You spent much time and effort to present your essay regarding this fedgov attack on citizens with the introduction of the abomination, H.R. 1296. Thank your for doing so.

    Thirty years ago I could not imagine this country changing to what it is today. You, I, and millions of others swore to defend our Constitution from enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC. Those congressional frauds called “representatives” have conspired to seditiously violate their oaths of office and the U.S. Constitution. In turn, it appears the United States Constitution is nearly meaningless to these domestic communists who bear U.S. citizenship. In my way of thinking these congressional scoundrels are simply citizen enemies of this nation they swore allegiance to !

    For all my years overseas defending foreign nations from supposed enemies, the true enemies, domestic enemies, have been ensconced right here at home undermining Freedom, Liberty and the sovereignty of the United States of America !

    May God have mercy on those Patriots who believe their oath has not expired. Sadly, it seems we are being driven to honorably defend our country and comply with the Oath we have taken. That Oath never having an expiration date.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s