HR1808 by Tom Reynolds
Many gun owners don’t vote. We have to change that and Democrats are trying to help us.
A recent vote in Congress emphasizes the need to vote in order to elect legislators who will protect our 2nd Amendment rights. The House of Representatives narrowly passed a sweeping Modern Sporting Rifle ban in a last-minute vote before the chamber left for its August recess. The House passed HR1808, which aims to regulate the Modern Sporting Rifle by banning the sale, manufacture, or transfer of a wide range of rifles commonly used by Americans.
Why does every vote count?
The vote was 217 to 213. Two Republicans, Chris Jacobs and Brian Fitzpatrick voted for the ban. (Jacobs recently dropped out of his reelection campaign in the 23rd Congressional District due to blowback from SCOPE and other 2A defense organizations when he said he supported the ban.) Had those two voted against the ban, there would have been a tie and since there is no tie breaking vote in the House, it would not have passed.
The bill, H.R. 1808, was sponsored by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), who believes stabilizing braces turn AR-pistols into an “automatic weapon.”
In a statement, President Biden applauded the decision.
If Republicans hold-the-line, the bill is unlikely to become law since it should NOT pass the Senate; it would need the support of 10 Republicans to pass.
In addition, the Supreme Court established a “common use” test in which firearms are protected under the Second Amendment if they are commonly used for lawful self-defense. A bill such as HR1808, which targets commonly used firearms, would be unlikely to be found constitutional, even if it were passed into law.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY) admitted during the hearing that the purpose of HR 1808 is to ban firearms in common use. He should know about the Supreme Court’s “common use” principle, but the gun grabbing left does not care about things like the U.S. Constitution, as it gets in their way.
The new federal Modern Sporting Rifle ban would ban nearly all ARs, AKs, AR pistols (and even many handguns and shotguns), making it illegal for a person to import, sell, manufacture, or transfer the following:
All semi-automatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one of the following features:
a pistol grip;
a forward grip;
a folding, telescoping, or detachable stock;
a grenade launcher;
barrel shroud;
a threaded barrel.
All semi-automatic rifles that have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 15 rounds.
Bump stocks and any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle but not convert the rifle into a machinegun under NFA definitions.
All semi-automatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one of the following features:
a threaded barrel;
a second pistol grip;
a barrel shroud;
a capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip;
a semi-automatic version of any automatic firearm.
All semi-automatic pistols that have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 15 rounds.
All semi-automatic shotguns that have at least one of the following:
a folding, telescoping, or detachable stock;
a pistol grip;
a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds;
the ability to accept a detachable magazine;
a forward grip;
a grenade launcher;
or a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
This bill has a "grandfather" clause, allowing for the sale, transfer, or possession of restricted weapons and magazines lawfully possessed before the bill's passage.
The new bill is even more draconian than the original 1994 ban. The Washington Post reported that Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed the 1994 ban “saved lives.”
Perhaps, Pelosi should “trust the science” and read the Department of Justice’s National Institute of Justice (NIJ) report…
The Washington Times quoted University of Pennsylvania professor Christopher Koper, author of that NIJ report: “We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence…The ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.” In other words, the ban could not be credited with any reduction in crime.
Concerning the 1994 ban, GQ magazine reported in 2016: “After every high-profile shooting, Democrats like Hillary Clinton call for a ban on ‘assault weapons’ the military-style rifles that have been dubbed the weapon of choice for mass shooters. There’s a problem with this popular liberal idea: banning these guns would not do much to save American lives. Only 3.6 percent of America’s gun murders are committed with any kind of rifle, according to FBI data. The majority of gun murders are committed with handguns.”
GQ added, “The Democrat staffers who wrote the now-expired 1994 federal assault weapon ban knew it was a largely symbolic policy.”
New York’s Senators will, undoubtably, vote for the bill. But gun owners should make their displeasure known to them, especially to Chuck Schumer who is up for reelection this November.
The bill specifically lists hundreds of banned firearms. Here is the link to read it: Text - H.R.1808 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Assault Weapons Ban of 2022 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
