Murphy, Esty, Blumenthal Unveil Assault Weapons Ban Of 2013

by Categorized: Newtown Date:

Members of Congress held a press conference Thursday to introduce legislation banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines. In announcing their proposal, Sen. Dianne Feinstein said that this legislation builds on and improves the 1994 assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004. Feinstein said the proposed ban, which would specifically ban 158 specifically-named military-style firearms and limit magazines to 10 rounds, does not contain a sunset provision. \”The purpose is to dry up the supply of these weapons overtime,\” she said.

\"blumThe legislation also contains provisions that would make it more difficult for manufacturers to work around the ban and expand background checks.

Sen. Schumer of New York described it as \”updated, smart and more robust version\” of the 1994 assault weapons ban.

Sen. Blumental said the measure could have prevented the Newtown tragedy, and that it\’s more stringent than Connecticut\’s existing assault weapons ban.  \”This measure would have prevented the type of weapon used at Newtown,\” said Blumenthal.

\”Kids would be alive today in Newtown, Conn. if the law had been in place on December 14. It’s that simple,\” said Sen. Chris Murphy, who took on the pro-gun lobby during his address.

\”Gun lobby has said it’s feel good legislation. You know what they’re right. It would feel really good,\” said Murphy, naming each child killed in the Newtown Massacre.

Assault weapons were displayed at the press conference, which lawmakers pointed to, asking \”why do we need these?\”

\"Screen

The Courant is using Facebook comments on stories. To comment on courant.com articles, sign into Facebook and enter your comment in the field below. Comments will appear in your Facebook News Feed unless you choose otherwise. To report spam or abuse, click the X next to the comment. For guidelines on commenting, click here.

12 thoughts on “Murphy, Esty, Blumenthal Unveil Assault Weapons Ban Of 2013

  1. Sharpshooter

    ah…the good, well-meaning progressives….mother-henning the populace and keeping America’s criminals safe from the law abiding citizens.

  2. Sam

    It is amazing how nieve these foolish politicians are that they really think restricting “legal” gun ownership will have any effect on phycos and criminals aquiring assault rifles. These guns will still find their way to the streets of our cities. These people are so foolish. But hey they are getting their names in the news and in politics thats all that matters. Right?

    1. johngaltwhereru

      Rick,

      Did you moderate Jenny Wilson’s “Gun Appreciation Day” blog?

      I was wondering why the moderator found it inappropriate for me to say that someone calling people “whitey cracker rednecks” is racist.

      1. Kim

        my comments have been repeatedly removed as well. Rick’s ‘moderating’ comment was a response to my questions that he didn’t allow to remain

      2. Kim

        my comments were in response to ‘did you hug your gun today’. I asked if he hugged a criminal today. Highly inappropriate.

        I’m sending an email to the Courant higherups this evening about this subjectivity and unrestrained power to censor

  3. Robert

    It’s disgusting how these people are using dead children to push their agendas through… Monsters.

    The Second Amendment is there to protect us from monsters like them!

  4. Bob

    Sorry people but you don’t need an AR 15 to shoot out windows, you can do it with a rock or a hammer. Lets outlaw them while you are at it. As horrible as the Sandy Hook shooting was, the guns were not the problem, the person was. He could have done the same thing with a home made pipe bomb or any other such implement of destruction. We need to spend more money on mental illness and help for those that need that kind of help. Not more “Knee Jerk” laws that will do absolutely NOTHING to curb gun violence. I live 7 miles from Sandy Hook and my grandson is one year away from entering public school. I also own a gun for personal protection. So this subject touches me close at heart. If you want to accomplish something with these hearings, enforce the laws we already have, don’t make new “Feel Good” laws because they won’t work and the only one that will feel good is you. Law abiding citizens don’t shoot up schools or theaters. We should be obliged to conceal carry to protect ourselves and others from the unstable people that do get their hands on these weapons.

  5. peter

    This is the beginning attempts to disarm the population, and if you stand by an do nothing you risk future ownership all together. The bills being introduced in CT are like an army of ants, you cannot stamp all of them out. Connecticut will become the new Australia.

  6. Bjkct

    Chris Murphy’s comments that “children would still be alive” is absolutely preposterous. This senator cannot be allowed to say something like this when he has no facts or no knowledge to back it up. Chris Murphy, please think twice before your mouth speaks. How disappointing.

  7. Anthony

    Chris murphy is a weapons expert now that he spent an hour watching a trooper shooting automatic weapons that are already banned.

Comments are closed.