H-17.5: Federal Assault Weapons Ban Act (Tabled)

[Sirius_]

AN ACT
To ban Assault Weapons.

Section 1: Title

1. This act may be cities as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban Act.

Section 2: Definitions

1. The following test shall be applied to determine whether or not a weapon is defined as an Assault Weapon

One of the following must be satisfied:

--Any device that uses direct impingement to expel a projectile from a barrel OR
--Any device that uses an open bolt mechanic (whether by integrating the firing pin with a bolt or components produced separately)

All of the following must be satisfied:

--Any device that, due to integral manufacturing features, cannot be held to a sustained, though not cyclic, rate of fire below 30 rounds/min (.5 rounds per second)

Section 3: Buyback

1. The government of Atlasia shalt henceforth establish an Atlasian Assault Weapon Buyback scheme.
2. This scheme shall cover all firearms which are covered under the definition of assault weapon agreed to in this bill.
3. The government shall pay back the full market price of the firearm to those who voluntarily hand in theirs.
4. The government of Atlasia shalt henceforth enumerate an amount of $1 Billion dollars to the aforementioned buyback program.

Section 4: Penalties

1. The manufacture and sale of Assault Weapons within the Republic of Atlasia is hereby illegal.
2. The penalty applied to manufacturers and sellers for infringing this law shall be fixed at 150% of profits made from manufacture and or sale.
3. The possession and use of Assault Weapons within the Republic of Atlasia is hereby a crime, if the weapon is used in illegal or illicit activities.
4. A person may only be punished for possession of an Assault Weapon if said person has committed a crime involving firearms.
5. In such cases, the government is compelled to seize all firearms possessed by the person in question, regardless of whether they qualify as assault weapons.

Section 5: Implementation

1. This act shall be implemented immediately.

Sponsor: Henry Wallace
Designation: H-17.5

[Mr. Reactionary]

Paygo?

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Paygo?

From my understanding it does not pass paygo.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

I motion to table this bill.

[Wikipedia delenda est]

I object to the motion to table. It is obviously far too early in debate to do so, as I haven't even begun to advocate yet. It is clear to me that an assault weapons ban is absolutely necessary, and the horrific shooting in New Zealand is just the most recent of many mass shootings that have been committed with these weapons. Atlasia formerly had an assaults weapons ban from 1994 to 2004, and we ought to again.

If the bill doesn't meet Paygo, I'll offer an amendment soon to fix it.

[Vern]

But doesn’t New Zealand have very strict gun laws?

[Wikipedia delenda est]

But doesn’t New Zealand have very strict gun laws?

No. They actually have quite lax gun laws. They're much more similar to US gun laws than Australian or European ones.

[Vern]

But doesn’t New Zealand have very strict gun laws?

No. They actually have quite lax gun laws. They're much more similar to US gun laws than Australian or European ones.

Ah, ok. I heard they did. But you always can’t believe what you hear.

[Pragmatic Conservative]

I object to the motion to table. It is obviously far too early in debate to do so, as I haven't even begun to advocate yet. It is clear to me that an assault weapons ban is absolutely necessary, and the horrific shooting in New Zealand is just the most recent of many mass shootings that have been committed with these weapons. Atlasia formerly had an assaults weapons ban from 1994 to 2004, and we ought to again.

If the bill doesn't meet Paygo, I'll offer an amendment soon to fix it.

You miss the point where criminals will just find other illegal means to get their hands on assault weapon. Chances are if you are really ok with committing mass murder than you probably have little issue with breaking a gun law. Essentially if your going to go to prison for life for murder how is an additional penalty for use of an illegal firearm an effective deterrent?  As for the manufacturing ban you seem to ignore the fact that even though the manufacturing of hard drugs is illegal many still do so. I fail to see how your ban is going to stop the manufacturing of assault weapons.In reality this ban will just put a major damper on a the hunting industry and security industry. Ultimately anything can be exploited so the answer shouldn’t be just ban what can be exploited but instead go after those that abuse the item in question.

[YE]

The left makes two major mistakes on the issue of gun control (and they’re both tied in):
-Gun culture is far more privalent in the United States, and this dates back to the slave trade, than the other major countries on Earth. That is why, simply put, the main reason why the United States has more mass shootings than anywhere else in Earth. It’s not as simple as “muh stricter gun laws elsewhere and there’s fewer mass shootings so let’s do the same”. Of course, said culture has historically not been as much of a danger as it is today, largely because guns historically were far less sophisticated.
-Having too strict of laws on anything really can have unintended consequences. Look at prohibition or the War on Drugs for proof. The last thing we need is guns being illegally sold on the black market, especially given my above point and the polarization observed IRL.

As for assault weapons bans themselves, they consist of loopholes (and if they don’t they generally run the risk of basically banning all semi-automatic weapons, which of course would risk my second point becoming a reality) that are easily exploited (and have been IRL) so to be frank, I never understood why the left is so adamant on enacting them. I guess because an AWB was passed under a DINO presidency IRL, but still.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Discussing this bill is sort of pointless without funding since it doesn't even come close to complying with paygo. Is it really that hard to at least make a stab at paygo before introducing a bill that clearly appropriates money? I mean dont get me wrong the above amount is woefully inadequate to pay for even this half baked bill but still, $1 billion in spending and no cuts or revenues at all isnt even trying. We had 1 half completed bill on the floor for 9 months because of that thinking.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Firstly, I'm not the most appreciative of someone taking my old Assault Weapons Ban, then only informing me after the fact.
Secondly, the sponsor of this bill misses the point entirely. I am most vehemently opposed to this bill in these circumstances. Why? Because this is not a federal issue. We need important and activity generating ideas like this to be kept at the regional level, and not to be snatched up by the federal government. Regardless of any discussion about gun control, the simple fact is is that it is most inappropriate for it to be handled on the federal level.
We need some important and polarising issues to stay with the regions, because the regions need activity too. If the regions have no controversial debate, their activity will greatly suffer.
So I would strongly encourage the house to reject this bill, either by tabling or by voting it down. Our regions need important and controversial issues like this to foster activity and debate at the regional level.

[Sirius_]

I personally do not believe that the vast majority of citizens need such high grade weapons. Nobody needs one to hunt, nobody needs one to protect their farm, and its overkill for "self defense". That does not make this bill perfect however. It does not pass paygo and 4.1 outlaws production and sale for military purposes. I'm currently a bit on the fence on the regional vs federal issue when it comes to this. Perhaps a compromise could be made on this front?

[Wikipedia delenda est]

Firstly, I'm not the most appreciative of someone taking my old Assault Weapons Ban, then only informing me after the fact.
Secondly, the sponsor of this bill misses the point entirely. I am most vehemently opposed to this bill in these circumstances. Why? Because this is not a federal issue. We need important and activity generating ideas like this to be kept at the regional level, and not to be snatched up by the federal government. Regardless of any discussion about gun control, the simple fact is is that it is most inappropriate for it to be handled on the federal level.
We need some important and polarising issues to stay with the regions, because the regions need activity too. If the regions have no controversial debate, their activity will greatly suffer.
So I would strongly encourage the house to reject this bill, either by tabling or by voting it down. Our regions need important and controversial issues like this to foster activity and debate at the regional level.

I literally asked you for permission beforehand, and you said you would "be honored" if I used your bill.

[Mr. Reactionary]

I can go into more detail later, but if this bill intends 100% compliance from owners during the buyback a quick back of the envelope estimate would be at least $24.748 billion and would also result in hits to tax revenues for NFA registrations and corporations that manufacture such weapons for private domestic, law enforcement, military and foreign export markets.

As ninja mentioned this would also require the military to buy its rifles from foreign countries. And this would have a major impact on the film industry which is the largest civilian owner of weapons affected by this law.

The above estimates though assume AR15s would be covered by the above definition which is debatable and also assumes 100% surrender rather than buy a $250 conversion kit. Adding a gas piston to the guts of an AR15 means its no longer direct impingement. There are 12 million forecasted AR15s in private hands in Atlasia.

[tmthforu94]

This doesn't have my support, but at minimum I would encourage a military exception.

[JGibson]

I would be in favor of voting for this bill, and would encourage a military exception to be included.

[Sirius_]

After some consideration, I believe that this is at least partially a federal issue under interstate commerce, and the regions can not solely handle it due to the ease of online transactions.

[Wikipedia delenda est]

I propose the following amendment:

AN ACT
To ban Assault Weapons.

Section 1: Title

1. This act may be cities as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban Act.

Section 2: Definitions

1. The following test shall be applied to determine whether or not a weapon is defined as an Assault Weapon

One of the following must be satisfied:

--Any device that uses direct impingement to expel a projectile from a barrel OR
--Any device that uses an open bolt mechanic (whether by integrating the firing pin with a bolt or components produced separately)

All of the following must be satisfied:

--Any device that, due to integral manufacturing features, cannot be held to a sustained, though not cyclic, rate of fire below 30 rounds/min (.5 rounds per second)

Section 3: Buyback

1. The government of Atlasia shalt henceforth establish an Atlasian Assault Weapon Buyback scheme.
2. This scheme shall cover all firearms which are covered under the definition of assault weapon agreed to in this bill.
3. The government shall pay back the full market price of the firearm to those who voluntarily hand in theirs.
4. The government of Atlasia shalt henceforth enumerate an amount of $1 Billion dollars to the aforementioned buyback program. Funds shall be determined and allocated during the Paygo budgeting process.

Section 4: Penalties

1. The manufacture and sale of Assault Weapons within the Republic of Atlasia is hereby illegal.
2. The penalty applied to manufacturers and sellers for infringing this law shall be fixed at 150% of profits made from manufacture and or sale.
3. The possession and use of Assault Weapons within the Republic of Atlasia is hereby a crime, if the weapon is used in illegal or illicit activities.
4. A person may only be punished for possession of an Assault Weapon if said person has committed a crime involving firearms.
5. In such cases, the government is compelled to seize all firearms possessed by the person in question, regardless of whether they qualify as assault weapons.

Section 5: Exemptions
1. Law enforcement and military personnel shall be exempt from all sections of this bill.

Section 5 6: Implementation

1. This act shall be implemented immediately.

[Sirius_]

I can go into more detail later, but if this bill intends 100% compliance from owners during the buyback a quick back of the envelope estimate would be at least $24.748 billion and would also result in hits to tax revenues for NFA registrations and corporations that manufacture such weapons for private domestic, law enforcement, military and foreign export markets.

As ninja mentioned this would also require the military to buy its rifles from foreign countries. And this would have a major impact on the film industry which is the largest civilian owner of weapons affected by this law.

The above estimates though assume AR15s would be covered by the above definition which is debatable and also assumes 100% surrender rather than buy a $250 conversion kit. Adding a gas piston to the guts of an AR15 means its no longer direct impingement. There are 12 million forecasted AR15s in private hands in Atlasia.

So, to be clear, since I won't claim to be an expert on operating guns, do these conversion kits reduce the capabilities of the AR-15 down to a more standard rifle rate?

[Sirius_]

AN ACT
To ban Assault Weapons.

Section 1: Title

1. This act may be cities as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban Act.

Section 2: Definitions

1. The following test shall be applied to determine whether or not a weapon is defined as an Assault Weapon

One of the following must be satisfied:

--Any device that uses direct impingement to expel a projectile from a barrel OR
--Any device that uses an open bolt mechanic (whether by integrating the firing pin with a bolt or components produced separately)

All of the following must be satisfied:

--Any device that, due to integral manufacturing features, cannot be held to a sustained, though not cyclic, rate of fire below 30 rounds/min (.5 rounds per second)

Section 3: Buyback

1. The government of Atlasia shalt henceforth establish an Atlasian Assault Weapon Buyback scheme.
2. This scheme shall cover all firearms which are covered under the definition of assault weapon agreed to in this bill.
3. The government shall pay back the full market price of the firearm to those who voluntarily hand in theirs.
4. The government of Atlasia shalt henceforth enumerate an amount of $1 Billion dollars to the aforementioned buyback program. Funds shall be determined and allocated during the Paygo budgeting process.

Section 4: Penalties

1. The manufacture and sale of Assault Weapons within the Republic of Atlasia is hereby illegal.
2. The penalty applied to manufacturers and sellers for infringing this law shall be fixed at 150% of profits made from manufacture and or sale.
3. The possession and use of Assault Weapons within the Republic of Atlasia is hereby a crime, if the weapon is used in illegal or illicit activities.
4. A person may only be punished for possession of an Assault Weapon if said person has committed a crime involving firearms.
5. In such cases, the government is compelled to seize all firearms possessed by the person in question, regardless of whether they qualify as assault weapons.

Section 5: Exemptions
1. Law enforcement and military personnel shall be exempt from all sections of this bill.

Section 5 6: Implementation

1. This act shall be implemented immediately.

Feedback: Origin
Status: Withdrawn

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

I object to the amendment. It is still an unfunded bill.

[Sirius_]

I object and ask that Rep. Wallace withdraws his amendment in favor the the following actions, and also ask that Rep. Thunder withdraws his objection:

1. Adopting the following amendment regarding military sale:

Section 4: Penalties

1. The manufacture and sale of Assault Weapons to civilians within the Republic of Atlasia is hereby illegal.
   a. This shall not be interpreted to prohibit the sale of assault weapons to government defense forces.

2. Considering different methods of reducing assault weapon ownership/lethality, and determining funding from there.

[Wikipedia delenda est]

I withdraw my amendment, and Ninja's amendment is friendly.

[Sirius_]

Section 4: Penalties

1. The manufacture and sale of Assault Weapons to civilians within the Republic of Atlasia is hereby illegal.
   a. This shall not be interpreted to prohibit the sale of assault weapons to government defense forces.

Feedback: Friendly
Status: 24 hours to object