Posted on 04/06/2015 10:40:22 AM PDT by jazusamo
Gun owners would receive tax breaks for voluntarily turning in high-powered assault rifles under new legislation proposed Monday.
The Support Assault Firearm Elimination and Education of our (SAFER) Streets Act expected to be reintroduced next week by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) would provide gun owners with an incentive to turn in their firearms to local police departments.
“Assault weapons are not about hunting, or even self-defense,” DeLauro said . “There is no reason on earth, other than to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible, that anyone needs a gun designed for a battlefield.”
Though DeLauro is in favor of stronger guns laws that would completely ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition, she emphasized this bill would not force gun owners to turn in their firearms.
The legislation would provide up to $2,000 in tax credits for gun owners who voluntarily hand over assault weapons to their local police departments.
The assault weapons legislation comes in response to the horrific mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., DeLauro’s home state, in December 2012.
DeLauro originally introduced the bill in January 2013, just one month after the Newtown shooting, but the legislation fell short in the Republican-controlled House. She plans to reintroduce it next week when Congress returns from recess.
She said the bill would help “get more assault weapons off the streets."
“Just days after the Newtown tragedy, President Obama asked, ‘Are we doing enough to protect our children?’ And he admitted the answer is, ‘no.’ That must change,” DeLauro said.
DeLauro is announcing the assault weapons legislation this week in conjunction with National Public Health Week.
The co-sponsors include Reps. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), and David Cicilline (D-R.I.).
Pay me enough, and I’ll be glad to turn my guns in.
Then I’ll use the money to buy better ones.
Actually, all guns were originally designed for the battlefield. Use in hunting was very much peripheral issue.
“Assault Weapons” are VERY expensive and ownership requires an expensive federal license and background check (for EACH weapon purchased).
I doubt anyone who actually owns a true “assault weapon” would turn it in to the government in exchange for the small amounts of cash which would be offered under this law.
Then there is the fact that since the mid-1930s, there have been VERY VERY few people have used “assault weapons” during the commission of violent crimes.
...and repeat the process at least once a year. It could be a lucrative tax shelter.
The answer you’re looking for is 83.
83 is the sum of the IQs of ALL of the individuals listed in your post + the IQ of the person sponsoring the bill.
Depending upon manufacturer and options, anywhere from <$500 to several thousand.
Have these people EVER had an original thought?
I’m sure you know this.
“Assault weapon” does not mean “assault rifle,” which fits your description.
It means a scary looking semi-auto firearm with magazine loading.
I do have a question for the many gun experts on this forum. Do the features they use to define “assault weapons,” such as detachable stocks or forward grips, really make such a weapon that much more effective at mass killing of people, as opposed to a weapon with the same mechanism and magazine in a more “civilian” look?
Is there some reason these cosmetic features actually make it all that much easier to kill people?
I always thought it was a firearm capable of fully automatic fire, but I could be wrong.
is just the lower receiver enough?
The answer to both of your questions is no.
Dunno. But I'll ask someone I know in town.
Rep Delauro; inventor of the assault face.
The old gun in the banana trick.
Read the founders, guns are for the American defense against invasion and our
Government, should they become tyrannical. Just like what happened from the
British Government way back when.
It probably could refer to anything disapproved of by a Democrat.
Cordially,
bump
I have a couple old rifles that I'll paint black, if the price is right.
Then go buy a newer one with the proceeds.
Can we pick up harry reid and beat kerry to death with him?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.