As usual, this would only effect law abiding citizens, not the criminals. The big point here is that more Democratic Party run states could give this a whirl
Governor wants New Mexico legislators to debate new approach to regulating assault-style weapons
New Mexico could become an early political testing ground for a proposal to make assault-style weapons less deadly.
Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham on Monday said she’ll encourage the state’s Democratic-led Legislature to consider statewide restrictions that mirror an unconventional proposal from U.S. senators aimed at reducing a shooter’s ability to fire off dozens of rounds a second and attach new magazines to keep firing.
The proposed federal Go Safe Act was named after the internal cycling of high-pressure gas in the firearms in question and comes from such senators as New Mexico’s Martin Heinrich, a Democrat. If approved, it would mean assault-style weapons would have permanently fixed magazines, limited to 10 rounds for rifles and 15 rounds for some heavy-format pistols.
“I’ve got a set of lawmakers that are more likely than not to have a fair debate about guns, gun violence, weapons of war and keeping New Mexicans safe than members of Congress are,” said Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, at a news conference in the state Capitol. “We will have to see how those votes all shake out.”
The Democrats have comfortable majorities in both the house and senate in the New Mexico general assembly, so, they can easily pass it if they so choose. But, what would all this accomplish? Will criminals comply, or will it just turn law abiding citizens into criminals while the real criminals do what they want? This is all an end run around the 2nd Amendment and Supreme Court rulings, which the Court will surely figure out.
Further, this is beyond disingenuous: no semi-automatic rifle or handgun can fire off dozens of rounds a second. You didn’t expect the Associated Press and “journalist” Morgan Lee to be honest and/or know how guns work.
If the GOP had any brains, even at the state level, they’d introduce legislation to allow those who protect the governor and others in the New Mexico governor to only carry the Go Safe approved weapons.
Mr Teach claims: this (Assualt weapon ban) would only effect law abiding citizens
What Mr Teach overlooks: Most of our American mass shooters using assault weapons bought their weapons legally! They were not criminals until they killed schoolkids, shoppers, churchgoers, synagogue-goers, etc..
And perhaps miscreants intent on the wholesale killing of innocents would either revert to the less useful semi-auto handguns on buy an assault weapon illegally underground.
Gratuitous insult: We understand many conservative men pretend to need an assault weapon to protect them and their family from “thugs” and the coming “full commie” attack from the next Democratic administration, but these are just excuses to support their feelings of inferiority that can only be assuaged by stroking their long gun. That’s really their only function. Cue the “fuck you”s!!
The distinguished Mr Dowd wrote:
Shades of <i>Minority Report, in which a specialized police department, apprehends criminals before they commit their crimes, by use of foreknowledge provided by three psychics called “precogs.” The about-to-be-guilty are arrested and punished before they get a chance to commit the crimes they supposedly intended. This isn’t even guilty until proven innocent, but guilty before you’re actually guilty!
Mr Dana once again misses the point. His political religion maintains that ANY American has the right to possess whatever weapon they desire.
Conservatives oppose thorough background checks, any record keeping… they oppose any action that might interfere or even prevent a nut from possessing military type firepower.
Did the 60 Americans and several hundred wounded in Las Vegas have any rights? How did the shooter purchase over a dozen AR-15s, thousands of rounds of ammo and bump stocks without arousing suspicion?
How about those 20 kids in Sandy Hook Elementary School? Did they have rights? How did the loony shooter get his hands on an AR-15?
And the 26 churchgoers in a Baptist church in Sutherland Springs TX? How did that psychopath get an AR-15?
Any moderate gun nut who believes an AR-15 is their best choice for home defense is a sucker.
Perhaps you moderate gun nuts need to control your psycho gun nuts. If you need help in controlling them how about backing effective background checks.
Being a Democrat means never having to accept “settled law”.
Maybe if Democrats stopped killing so many people, Republicans wouldn’t feel the need to keep so many guns for self defense.
Maybe if Democrats in the press stopped overhyping every shooting incident, Republicans would feel safer and choose to buy a new backyard grill instead.
Maybe if Democrats in government stopped trying to take everyone’s guns, Republicans would stop believing government was trying to take their guns.
Maybe if Democrats took seriously border security and crime prevention, Republicans wouldn’t feel the need to be armed at all.
Maybe if Democrats stopped instigating war against the American people, Republicans wouldn’t feel like they needed “weapons of war” to defend themselves.
It’s almost as if there is a cause and effect relationship between all of these things.
Mr Teach claimed: no semi-automatic rifle or handgun can fire off dozens of rounds a second
The court is weighing the legality of Donald Trump’s bump stock ban. It’s likely moot since kids are 3D printing bump stocks now.
Mr Teach is correct. Even with a bump stock the semi-auto assault weapons of the Las Vegas mass shooter delivered 9 rounds per second (according to videos). It took him 10 minutes to kill 60 and wound over 400, firing at least 1000 shots, hardly 100 shots a minute! All 24 of his firearms were legally purchased.
Chicken Little Man
New Mexico could become an early political testing ground for a proposal to make assault-style weapons less deadly.
Style? What will be the next style to fall out of favor?? Should the 2nd say this?
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear popularly styled Arms, shall not be infringed.
Would that make you feel safer?
We understand many conservative men pretend to need an assault weapon to protect them and their family
Uh… The proposed NM law is about assault style so I don’t see how your highly stupid comment is relevant.
But based on the crime now on going in our Democratic controlled cities a person does need an actual assault weapon, say M16 and a grenade launcher for protection.
That’s the thing with gun-grabbing Democrats. They pretend like we have the memories of goldfish and cannot remember the 100 year history of gun control in America, as well as arms control in other nations. Historically, arms control ALWAYS precedes oppression. ALWAYS. Used for hundreds of years in Japan to oppress their peasants and prevent them from revolting. Used in the USA to prevent black slaves from revolting against slave owners, then used to prevent newly freed slaves from defending themselves against Democrats who wanted to lynch them.
The “style” arguments started with the NFA in 1934 when lawmakers declared that short barreled rifles (sawed off shotguns) were connected to criminal activity, even though there was no evidence for claiming that. Then in the 70’s the style shifted to “Saturday night specials” (inexpensive revolvers). Then something called “cop-killer bullets” which never really materialized. Then Clinton administration ban on assault weapons even though the use of any rifle in a crime was almost non-existent and ten years of the law proved totally ineffective at reducing crime. Then Clinton Admin Surgeon General campaigned for “Safer guns and safer bullets”, another meaningless gesture to fix a non-existent problem. Then the push to ban “high capacity magazines” which drove the market to produce really nice concealable handguns. With magazine changes completely making this law pointless. Then California banning 50 caliber rifles because they might be used to shoot down an airplane or rob an armored car, even though they never have been used for that in the past.
The trend is clear. There will always be some new fashion firearm that needs to be banned because the goal of gun control is always total confiscation from the “peasants” so that they cannot revolt when you oppress them. And they (rich, powerful and connected people) absolutely intend to oppress us. They tell us they intend to. They cannot help themselves. Whether it is charging us more for energy use based on miniscule and harmless trace gas production or stealing your saved wealth with heavy inflation, the people at the top of the ladder do not want you following them up it.
The really puzzling part is how they manage to get so many other peasants to follow them. I guess the message, “vote for us and we will give you their stuff” polls well.
Professor Hale: There will always be some new fashion firearm that needs to be banned because the goal of gun control is always total confiscation from the “peasants” so that they cannot revolt when you oppress them.
Just another of the far-right’s conspiracy tales. Do they really want a national military so weak it can be defeated by pissed-off residents? Of course not. *Wolverines!!
Despite the lies of the far-right and people like the Professor, Americans have access to a wider variety of firearms than do citizens of other nations. We have over 300 million firearms in the US!!
Mr Teach misleads his hapless readers from time to time claiming that AR-15 style semi-auto rifles are no different than a wooden-stocked .223 hunting rifle with a 3 round magazine. Can Mr Teach explain why every modern military prefers AR-15 style rifles (but with selective auto fire)? The answer is that the size, weight, versatility make AR-15 style rifles more effective for killing other humans.
Asking an AR-15 advocate why they “need” one, they respond “because, fuck you, that’s why!” “The 2nd Amendment says I can have any gun I want!” The Supreme Court disagrees.
Why do people want to ban the AR-15 style rifles? Because they are used in the weekly mass shootings that occur in the US (and few other places). Simple.
We do understand that a minority of far-right Americans are afraid of where the nation has gone and is going, i.e., same-sex marriage, drag shows, Muslims, Mexicans, black crime, global warming, etc. The normal order of America is neither swift enough or thorough enough to satisfy this far-right minority – they can’t win elections – so they are calling for rebellion. They have congealed around the visage of Donald Trump, a larger-than-life, autocratic, TV game show host and self-promoter. There’s a sucker born every minute.
The US Supreme Court (US v. Miller, 1939) held that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual the right to keep and bear a sawed-off double-barrel shotgun. That result can be revisited at any time.
Machine guns are NOT banned. As of 2021, the national registry of machine guns contained registrations for 741,146 machine guns! But, importantly, the US gubmint tracks the registration of machine guns. So, when the revolution starts, the feds will be at your door.
Saturday night specials are not banned, although Lynyrd Skynyrd says:
Hand guns are made for killin’
They ain’t no good for nothin’ else
And if you like to drink your whiskey
You might even shoot yourself
Chicken Man! He’s Everywhere! He’s Everywhere!,
If you were addressing me, I didn’t mention New Mexico.
Is it your belief that the 2nd Amendment gives one the right to any and all weapons? Our Supreme Court, which interprets the Constitution, says that is not the case.
The murder rate is much lower now than during the reigns of Reagan and Bush the 1st! You are losing it.
Even today, the murder rate is highest in Republican run states like Louisiana.
Democrats/progressives/socialists/communists, or whatever one wishes to refer to the group on the left as, have only the desire to disarm the populace. That is always an initial step on the way to the totalitarian state they desire. Allowing criminals to freely roam is merely subterfuge to allow criminal acts to provide support for the disarmament plans of the left. Of course, along the way, the left never lets fact or reason get in their way. Their useful idiots in the press and society in general continue to spread dishonest representations, distortions, half-truths, and just plain lies.
Never overlook their long term objective.
Republicans/MAGAts/conservatives/fascists/Nazis, or whatever one wishes to refer to the group on the right as, have only the desire to assuage their inherent fears and insecurities with “big” guns.
The far-right’s belief that the liberals want Americans disarmed is false (and BTW, impossible). It’s just another far-right talking point you’ve been fed by your handlers.
The proposed bans of the useless AR-15 style rifles is to reduce the carnage associated with mass shootings. Period. The “men” who insist they need these rifles to protect themselves from a totalitarian government are lying to themselves. We understand that 2nd Amendment fetishists feel the government has no right to limit access to any personal firearm and that’s the source of disagreement. “Who is the government to tell me I don’t 30 round magazines!!” Freedom!!
The Supreme Court holds that the 2nd Amendment protects the right to possess a firearm to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
Fuck you.
OK, but just this once.
Hate to admit reading an Elwood post but, facists and nazis are/were socialists. Just a slightly different flavor of the same swill.
So no, the Nazis of Hitler were not socialists.
So while there is some overlap between socialism and fascism, the requirements for a dictator and the suppression of opposition contradicts the collectivist ideal of socialism.
I have to admit Jeff may be onto something. Congress should ban Democrats from having firearms. They do seems to commit the most gun-related violence including mass shootings. If you vote democrat, you obviously support democratic party agenda on gun confiscation. Do it for yourselves first and we’ll measure the results and see if it is worth the effort of doing it to everyone. It’s not even against the constitution since a voluntary “give-back” is a rational response to what the democrats are proposing for everyone else. No exemptions for democrats in police or military. No hiring armed guards either. Put your skin in the game or STFU. Start recording on arrest records party affiliations. Confiscate guns from all those people who have ever filled a prescription for anti-anxiety or depression meds. Get back to me when you see the results from that. We already have results from the previous assault weapons ban: No effect on crime or mass shootings. The latest attempts at banning is just another attempt at a very old process and the goal is a totally dissarmed population.
Most excellent concept, Professor. A voluntary self disarmament of all democrats would have a noticeable effect.
The Nutty Perfesser sucks balls… again!
He has no interest in anything except political partisanship, LOL! Some perfesser he/she is!
They propose laws that only apply to folks of a particular persuasion – folks he dislikes. BTW, perfesser, I don’t own either an AR-15 nor a semi-auto pistol. I don’t even know one of my friends (mostly Dems) possessing an AR-15, although they have plenty of 30-06, 7mm-08, 7mm Mag, .308, .270, .243, 30-30, plus 12g an 20g shotguns – mostly semi-autos!!… I’m looking into 6.5 Creedmoor for deer hunting. A few friends and relatives do have 9mm or .40 semi-auto pistols. I have a Colt police special 6-shooter. So maybe, just maybe, most libs HAVE “given up” their useless AR-15s.
AR-15 fetishists claim they are better for home defense than a hunting rifle. That’s what is known as a self-own. According to Mr Teach there is no difference between an AR-15 and a hunting rifle. Which is it, are they different or not, LOL? There’s a reason militaries choose the AR-15 platform, over the M-1 or M-14. Everyone agrees that a tactical shotgun is a better home defense weapon.
It’s a fact that most mass shooters use AR-15 style assault weapons or semi-auto pistols. They take advantage of large, exchangeable magazines. It’s also a fact that most mass shootings in the developed world happen in the US, where these assault weapons are not just legal, but widely possessed.
Conservatives and libertines argue that only a small percentage of murdered Americans are victims of mass shootings. True! They further argue that the media overplay the impact of mass shootings of schoolchildren, WalMart and mall shoppers, theater goers, diners and drinkers and dancers, because the media are left-wingers who want to disarm America.
The response from AR-15 fetishists is always, “Fuck you, because I want one”.
Living your life in perpetual fear is no way to live.
living your life perpetually threatening your fellow Americans to take away their constitutional rights and no way to live either. Oh maybe for a communist like you it is but not for normal people.
You guys figure we don’t remember then owning an AR15 was the compromise. The compromise was from Full Auto to semi auto and that’s as far as we’re gonna go. You have us back the muskets if you could or better yet slingshots.
If all AR fifteens disappeared off the face of the earth today mass shooters would use something else. If all 10 round magazines disappeared same thing. All you would do would be to move the bar.
As usual you’re looking for a 100% success rate. Just like you’re ridiculous cult of climate. As long as there’s one mass shooting those weapons have to be eliminated. Right? The end goal is the elimination of all weapons in the hands of civilians. That’s always been your goal and that’s why I love you having weapons. You prove that people like you only want power over others you’re not even hypocrites you’re out and out power mad liars. You’re just the kind of people that once all guns are removed you start killing your enemies in the streets and so in there wives and children in prisons. we’ve seen people like you before. And we’re not gonna have it here.
So polish up those black boots, done your riding pants and arm bands, trim your little moustaches and shove it up your ass. We’re not playing that game in America.
L.G. Brandon: The compromise was from Full Auto to semi auto and that’s as far as we’re gonna go.
That “compromise” occurred nearly 100 years ago. Semi-auto rifles were not a problem until the AR-15 style platform was adopted by militaries (which they borrowed from the private ArmaLite) and Colt (and later other manufacturers) started marketing them as military weapons.
The M16 was was adopted to compete against the enemies armed with AK-47s.
Early on (early 60s), Colt marketed the AR-15 as an improved hunting rifle but it’s lack of accuracy and small caliber (.223) made it not ideal for either small or large game.
Hello Vietnam!! The military M16 had evolved from the AR-15 platform and suddenly 4Fers could be soldiers without the danger! Colt started marketing AR-15s as “Designed from the famous Colt M16 military rifle”!! Then, importantly, their patent on the gas system expired in 1977 and multiple manufacturers swooped in to market their own AR-15 style rifles. The rest is history!!
In 1990 1.2% of US firearms manufactured were AR-15 style. By 2020 it was 23.4%.
The first US, non-military killings attributed to an AR-15 were the deaths of two FBI gents in a June 26, 1975, shooting on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota.
The first mass shooting involving an AR-15 was in Klamath Falls, OR where a man killed 6 people on July 23, 1977.
The cover of the white nationalist novel The Turner Diaries, published in 1978, depicts an AR-15.
And sales soared!
A gun manufacturer said their customers were “couch commandos” and “tactards” (short for “tactical retards”): “wannabes” who were trying to look cool but lacked any skill or discipline. The gun looked martial and intimidating, but Eugene Stoner had designed it to be easy to aim and shoot for just about anyone…. In many ways, the AR-15 was the ideal firearm for the modern American man: it looked macho, but he didn’t have to put much effort into shooting it.”
Bushmaster considered ads in 2009 – “Helping Men Grow a Pair Since 1978” and “It Is Never Too Late to Be a Man,” before releasing “Consider Your Man Card Reissued.”
And the industry relies on paranoia to market their weapons as a guard against government tyranny.
The American “patriots” have been hornswoggled by the gun sellers, and kids are the victims.
The esteemed Mr Dowd wrote:
Is our socialist from St Louis arguing that only intelligent people have Second Amendment rights? Careful, Mr Dowd, because if we require an IQ test for being able to own a firearm, we could also require it for voting, or the freedom of speech, something which would definitely disenfranchise and silence Democrats disproportionately!
One of the great things about the AR15 is that it doesn’t take an expert to safely and effectively use it. That is the main reason the army adopted it. Lower traning costs. Flat trajectory means no calculating bullet drop or adjusting the sight depending on range.
Also lower unit cost per weapon was a huge plus. Same reasons civilians like it. Nothing to do with mass murder. Nothing. Other militaries only adopt AR15 type rifles if we give them to them. Otherwise they make their own guns based on the same ammo. But the US army has already decided to ditch the m-4 in favor of a 6.8mm round. So… I guess that makes the 5.56mm a bullet rejected by most of the armies of the world.
Is our fascist from Fayette intentionally misinterpreting what the gun manufacturer meant?
The customers for AR-15 type rifles are gullible couch commandos, tactards and wannabes playing Army. They fell for the adverts. That Army-looking rifle would finally make them a man. He wasn’t calling them unintelligent.
Mr Dana appears to assume that Americans have the right to any firearm they desire. The 2nd Amendment is not a suicide pact.
Of course we wouldn’t support tests for rights. That’s a conservative view, who would absolutely support tests for voting.
Our wokester from West of Illinois wrote:
As it happens, while I lived in Fayette County from 1971 through 1984, I’m not really from there. I grew up in Montgomery County, and currently reside in Estill. I do hope that helps your attempts at alliteration!
Actually, I do more than “assume” that; I believe it to be precisely what the Second Amendment states. Remember: the Constitution states that Congress has the power to issue letters of marque and reprisal, a provision which assumes the private ownership of cannon and ships of war.
That’s because conservatives understand that any rational tests for voting would seriously disenfranchise liberals, the majority of whom are just boneheadedly stupid. We’ve just seen three presidents of some of the top universities in the country, the University of Pennsylvania, Hahvahd, and MIT, the first a top attorney, law professor and former Supreme Court clerk, and the latter two holding PhDs, seemingly collude to give the same, utterly stupid answer to a question in a congressional subcommittee, would calls for genocide against Jews be violations of their schools’ rules or codes of conduct, and all three gave the same dumb-as-a-box-of-rocks response, that it would depend on the context. Even the lowest ranking freshman would have seen immediately how the question, had it been about blacks or homosexuals, would have generated an automatic ‘of course it would violate the rules, and they’d be expelled’ answer, but two PhDs and a JD totally f(ornicated) it up.
One, Liz Magill of Penn, has already
been firedresigned, but Hahvahd is keeping Claudine Gay, despite additional documentation that she plagiarized parts of her doctoral dissertation.It appears that having highly advanced degrees doesn’t always mean that the possessors of such aren’t idiots.
Dimocrat logic.
#Trump2024
Bwaha! Lolgf
you cut and paste all kinds of shady quotes and nonsense reports that supposedly support your position but actually don’t support your position because they make you look like a fool and then you come up and do the coup de grace. You stand there and accuse conservatives supporting tests for voting when you know full well historically it’s been Democrats who had every kind of test you could think of to stop blacks from voting and owning firearms and marrying white people and buying property. You really shouldn’t go into that area of stopping people’s freedom because the Democrats have been trying to do that since day one. You sound silly when you say stupid stuff like that. Of course you sound silly all the time so that’s no big deal but I just figured you’d like to know. Now go back to your left this websites and read more nonsense than corrupt your brain cause your brain’s already lost anyhow and go back and Google all kinds of goofy stuff and then cut and paste it here like it’s true because you read it on the Internet.