Age limit on Assault and Magazines
Sen. Feinstein Proposes Age Limit for ?Assault Weapons? and ?High Cap? Mags
by Jordan Michaels on May 2, 2019
Related Tags: Buzz, Gun Control, News, R2KBA
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) has introduced more gun-control legislation. (Photo: Facebook)
U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein reintroduced this week a bill that would raise the minimum age to 21 for anyone attempting to purchase an ?assault weapon? and/or a ?high-capacity? magazine. The California Democrat introduced the same bill last year in the Senate, but has decided to try her hand again in the wake of a murder that took place at a San Diego synagogue last week.
?If you?re too young to purchase a handgun, you shouldn?t be able to buy an assault rifle,? Feinstein said. ?It?s common sense to prevent the sale of deadly assault weapons to individuals who aren?t even allowed to buy a beer. This isn?t a fix-all bill, but it closes a gaping loophole in federal gun safety laws, and I hope the Senate will act on it swiftly.?
Current federal law allows anyone age 18 or older to purchase any type of rifle, and there is no minimum age requirement to purchase a magazine. Eighteen-year-olds are considered legal adults under U.S. law and are permitted to enter the military, register to vote, get married, and purchase cigarettes.
While the text of Feinstein?s legislation hasn?t been released, last year?s version of the bill restricted the sale of semi-automatic rifles deemed ?assault weapons,? magazines with capacities over ten rounds, and (strangely) ?ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun or semiautomatic assault weapon.?
SEE ALSO: Kavanaugh, Feinstein Square Off on 2A During Confirmation Hearing
That bill was also sponsored by Republican Arizona Senator Jeff Flake, who famously quarreled with President Trump before retiring after the senator?s term ended last year. President Trump briefly supported raising the age limit to purchase ?assault rifles? before backing off the idea several weeks later.
Without the President?s support, Feinstein and Flake?s bill died in a Republican-controlled Senate committee. There?s little reason to believe the same won?t happen this year.
The Gun Control Act of 1968 first established age restrictions on firearms purchases, setting the minimum age for long guns (rifles and shotguns) to 18 and handguns to 21. Age restrictions on ?assault weapons? have been in vogue recently after several high-profile massacres were perpetrated by adults under the age of 21.
But despite recent anomalies, research indicates that most mass murderers acquire their firearms from friends and family.
SEE ALSO: Feinstein Admits No Law Would?ve Stopped Vegas Shooter
A report published last year by the Federal Commission on School Safety noted as much in its comprehensive review of policies designed to stop school shootings.
?The existing research findings on the efficacy of current minimum age of firearm purchase laws do not support the conclusion that those laws have a measurable impact on reducing homicides, suicides, or unintentional deaths,? the report says.
That?s not likely to stop Feinstein, of course, who?s made a career out of proposing anti-gun policies. The California Senator was one of the architects behind the now-defunct 1994 ?assault weapons? ban and has more recently proposed a renewal of that policy.
by Jordan Michaels on May 2, 2019
Related Tags: Buzz, Gun Control, News, R2KBA
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) has introduced more gun-control legislation. (Photo: Facebook)
U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein reintroduced this week a bill that would raise the minimum age to 21 for anyone attempting to purchase an ?assault weapon? and/or a ?high-capacity? magazine. The California Democrat introduced the same bill last year in the Senate, but has decided to try her hand again in the wake of a murder that took place at a San Diego synagogue last week.
?If you?re too young to purchase a handgun, you shouldn?t be able to buy an assault rifle,? Feinstein said. ?It?s common sense to prevent the sale of deadly assault weapons to individuals who aren?t even allowed to buy a beer. This isn?t a fix-all bill, but it closes a gaping loophole in federal gun safety laws, and I hope the Senate will act on it swiftly.?
Current federal law allows anyone age 18 or older to purchase any type of rifle, and there is no minimum age requirement to purchase a magazine. Eighteen-year-olds are considered legal adults under U.S. law and are permitted to enter the military, register to vote, get married, and purchase cigarettes.
While the text of Feinstein?s legislation hasn?t been released, last year?s version of the bill restricted the sale of semi-automatic rifles deemed ?assault weapons,? magazines with capacities over ten rounds, and (strangely) ?ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun or semiautomatic assault weapon.?
SEE ALSO: Kavanaugh, Feinstein Square Off on 2A During Confirmation Hearing
That bill was also sponsored by Republican Arizona Senator Jeff Flake, who famously quarreled with President Trump before retiring after the senator?s term ended last year. President Trump briefly supported raising the age limit to purchase ?assault rifles? before backing off the idea several weeks later.
Without the President?s support, Feinstein and Flake?s bill died in a Republican-controlled Senate committee. There?s little reason to believe the same won?t happen this year.
The Gun Control Act of 1968 first established age restrictions on firearms purchases, setting the minimum age for long guns (rifles and shotguns) to 18 and handguns to 21. Age restrictions on ?assault weapons? have been in vogue recently after several high-profile massacres were perpetrated by adults under the age of 21.
But despite recent anomalies, research indicates that most mass murderers acquire their firearms from friends and family.
SEE ALSO: Feinstein Admits No Law Would?ve Stopped Vegas Shooter
A report published last year by the Federal Commission on School Safety noted as much in its comprehensive review of policies designed to stop school shootings.
?The existing research findings on the efficacy of current minimum age of firearm purchase laws do not support the conclusion that those laws have a measurable impact on reducing homicides, suicides, or unintentional deaths,? the report says.
That?s not likely to stop Feinstein, of course, who?s made a career out of proposing anti-gun policies. The California Senator was one of the architects behind the now-defunct 1994 ?assault weapons? ban and has more recently proposed a renewal of that policy.
0
-
Yep makes all sorts of sense to me, you're not old enough to buy a sporting rifle or a high cap mag, but you're old enough to have a fully automatic assault rifle issued to you by the government when you join the armed forces 
Common Sense my brown eye0 -
largest thing I see on this is that Feinstein blinked. Here they are for years..Dems clear back to the 94 Clinton ban wanting assault weapons completely ban. Now the only thing is age. Seems to me that all the laws that have been passed banning mags in kalifornia would be null, since they are saying it is only about age . 0 -
whose idea was it to jack up the drinking age to 21?! put it back to 18 and we can talk
btw before that it used to be 17... and before that it was 16...0 -
Same people who want to make the age to vote 16. 0 -
Kicked down so many times we'll just take it. When will they finally say enough is enough and stop trampling on my damn rights.
Being illegal "citizens" in California they got better rights.
Also with the "stay" it's not like we can buy "freedom" magazines. Strange how the Jew Temple took a hit near where the judge who slapped the "high Cap Ban" unconstitutional. Kind a make one think the dems are orchestrating these hit squads. The "Manchurian Candidate Program" is more tuned to off civilians instead of head of the states.
I'm waiting on folks to get sent up to the big house who install standard AR magazines in to Magazine Locked ARs. Result of Freedom Week.0 -
buschmaster wrote:whose idea was it to jack up the drinking age to 21?! put it back to 18 and we can talk
btw before that it used to be 17... and before that it was 16...
You pay Taxes at 18, right?
Can't buy so and so until you are 21?
Change the Tax Law, to 21 years of age also.
All in, or all out. Can not have it both ways.0 -
KenK/84Bravo wrote:buschmaster wrote:whose idea was it to jack up the drinking age to 21?! put it back to 18 and we can talk
btw before that it used to be 17... and before that it was 16...
You pay Taxes at 18, right?
Can't buy so and so until you are 21?
Change the Tax Law, to 21 years of age also.
You pay taxes as soon as you have something that is taxable, age has nothing to do with it.0 -
I had a kid working for me, who was released from the US Army because of a bad fall from a M1A1 Abrams tank.
He was 20 years old with a life time back injury.
He told stories about how his job was to fire a HEATor sabot tank round into an enemy tank,
killing 5 men and destroying a multi-million dollar tank.
But he could not buy a .22 revolver back in the USA.0 -
babun wrote:I had a kid working for me, who was released from the US Army because of a bad fall from a M1A1 Abrams tank.
He was 20 years old with a life time back injury.
He told stories about how his job was to fire a HEAT sabot tank round into an enemy tank,
killing 5 men and destroying a multi-million dollar tank.
But he could not buy a .22 revolver back in the USA.
It would have been either HEAT or Sabot, but the point remains valid.
We can trust youngsters to fight our battles for us, but do not trust them with a pistol or a beer when they come home.
Age restrictions on semi-auto ownership have been passed in a number of states already. A Federal law is simply a stepping stone. If we can 'Constitutionally' deny one group of citizens access to a type of firearms, there is no reason that we cannot Constitutionally deny access to all, and then move forward with a production and purchase ban followed by a possession ban.
From what I understand there were 68 deaths associated with mass shootings they may or may not have included the use of these types of rifles in 2018. 68 deaths are bad. The individual loss is tragic not only to the victims, but to the victims' families and communities.
In the big picture, however, it is an extremely small number and the push to deny these weapons to the general public cannot logically be ascribed to the goal of public safety. As with most collectivist agendas, this is more likely an effort to disarm the populace so as to increase the relative power of the state.
We are losing the masses because the national conversation has become one of how do we prevent these 68 deaths from occurring this year and next year. IMO, this end result of this discussion can be nothing but an ever widening net of restriction. The debate will not be won until we can convince the bulk of the population that there is a legitimate reason to have a populace armed to the point of being a credible deterrent to a politicized military or a militarized police.0 -
Chicago is now the most firearms restrictive anti gun city in the country...
They have instituted legislation making it virtually impossible to legally obtain a handgun...
They have passed laws and instituted restrictions promising gun free zones safe from crime committed with a firearm - they have essentially banned the offending item telling us we will be safer and protected from ourselves by the state.
They instituted the firearms id card system and require a separate handgun permit for each purchase issued and approved by local police chiefs after a federal background check and a nics check at point of sale - each step requiring a background check and a schedule of fees and taxes...
They used public funds and taxes and fees to create a new integrated computer system joining all criminal data bases to prevent felons from obtaining a firearm.
The system did not function as desired and they issued thousands of permits to felons and parolees who went and bought handguns - the state when the error was discovered and was known to have been leaked to the press mailed letters to the criminals who had bought firearms requesting that they turn the guns and permits back in - the state did not go retrieve those guns despite knowing who bought them and where they lived...
Already one of these guns has been used to kill - criminal murder - after the letters went out - the gent in question was on parole and living in a half way house but was issued a permit and sold a gun...
We are approaching 1000 black on black shootings and murders a year in Chicago despite all the bans and laws - it's an African American genocide and when combined with the numbers of abortions performed in the community in question makes the holocaust pale by comparison.
Third World countries and active combat zones are safer.
You cannot possibly view the data and not see a massive failure and a modern apocalypse no matter how liberal and progressive you claim to be.
These laws do not stop criminals from getting guns and killing folk.
They only disarm the general population and remove the ability to defend life and liberty and property on even ground...
As long as we have a permanent disenfranchised black underclass kept down and segregated and marginalized by the DNC the problem will grow and fester.
Mike0 -
Agree 100% - and very well said...mrmike08075 wrote:Chicago is now the most firearms restrictive anti gun city in the country...
They have instituted legislation making it virtually impossible to legally obtain a handgun...
They have passed laws and instituted restrictions promising gun free zones safe from crime committed with a firearm - they have essentially banned the offending item telling us we will be safer and protected from ourselves by the state.
They instituted the firearms id card system and require a separate handgun permit for each purchase issued and approved by local police chiefs after a federal background check and a nics check at point of sale - each step requiring a background check and a schedule of fees and taxes...
They used public funds and taxes and fees to create a new integrated computer system joining all criminal data bases to prevent felons from obtaining a firearm.
The system did not function as desired and they issued thousands of permits to felons and parolees who went and bought handguns - the state when the error was discovered and was known to have been leaked to the press mailed letters to the criminals who had bought firearms requesting that they turn the guns and permits back in - the state did not go retrieve those guns despite knowing who bought them and where they lived...
Already one of these guns has been used to kill - criminal murder - after the letters went out - the gent in question was on parole and living in a half way house but was issued a permit and sold a gun...
We are approaching 1000 black on black shootings and murders a year in Chicago despite all the bans and laws - it's an African American genocide and when combined with the numbers of abortions performed in the community in question makes the holocaust pale by comparison.
Third World countries and active combat zones are safer.
You cannot possibly view the data and not see a massive failure and a modern apocalypse no matter how liberal and progressive you claim to be.
These laws do not stop criminals from getting guns and killing folk.
They only disarm the general population and remove the ability to defend life and liberty and property on even ground...
As long as we have a permanent disenfranchised black underclass kept down and segregated and marginalized by the DNC the problem will grow and fester.
Mike0 -
By that standard I am old enough to qualify for ICBM's. 0 -
I'm with you He Dog. Where is our red phone? 0 -
Warbirds wrote:Same people who want to make the age to vote 16.
So right! Irony, how does it work again?0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
14 comments