Harry Reid Says Assault Weapons Ban is Doomed

It would be an iffy proposition in the Senate to pass a ban on “assault weapons,” and would have no chance in the House, says the Majority Leader.


The Democratically-controlled U.S. Senate will not be a free-for-all of new gun regulations following the shooting at Sandy Hook, according to Majority Leader Harry Reid. Instead, Senators will focus on passing legislation that can move through the Republican-controlled House, Reid said.

That could spell doom for an assault weapons ban. Speaking on Nevada Week In Review, a news show on the PBS affiliate in Las Vegas, Reid said there’s no real chance of a new ban passing the House.

Post Continues on www.americanthinker.com

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Politics Tagged with: ,
30 comments on “Harry Reid Says Assault Weapons Ban is Doomed
  1. fliteking says:

    Harry does not need to pass a ban.

    The King plans to set down his own law.

    Republican leaders will briefly protest and then toss their cards on the table.

    Citizens will then be left to stand or surrender under the thumb of the Progressives and King Obama.

  2. When the government wrote the laws which made the carry of self-protection in a school illegal, then the government was saying that the government will be the one responsible for your protection while at a school.

    And the government sadly failed to protect and defend at Sandy Hook Elementary.

    Where are the lawsuits then, by Sandy Hook parents suing the government for their neglegent failure to protect?

  3. When our ambassador was killed in Libya, by an army of adults, our government did not hesitate to placed the blame on a movie. The government certainly did not blame itself for its negligence in protecting its own people even did it.

    But when young impressionable boys with mental disease issues, at places like Sandy Hook and Columbine, kill children, you are called an idiot if you question whether or not our Jewish movie producers may be partly to blame, such as in the Jewish Weinstein Brothers production social entertainment of Django Unchained, where a black man spends 3 hours in the film in the wanton killing of all the white men he comes across.

    • Frank says:

      In the movies you mentioned, those white men deserved what they got. It’s called justice.

      Movies and video games don’t cause people to kill. Insanity is almost certainly at the root of these mass killings. Take away all movies and games and that would make a difference.

      You post makes you sound like a bigot and I’m sure you are given your blaming of jews. You need to spend some time in church asking for forgiveness.

      A new AWB will never pass the Congress anyway.

      • Not all those men as depicted in the Weinstein movie deserved to die.

        When Django was being taken to the salt mines, he talked his captors into helping him bring bad guys to justice and so they trusted him with a gun. With gun in hand, Django immediately murdered all three of these white men in cold blood.

        But you miss the point of the movie. It was to smear white noses in the manure of slavery in the most sensational way.

        Tarantino did the same to Germans with his movie called Inglorious Bastards where Jews kill every white man they see, as well as in Tarantino’s movie Machete, were a Mexican slays every white man he sees.

        See a pattern yet?

      • Movies and video games don’t cause people to kill.

        Funny, our black President was quick to blame a single movie for Muslims killing our Libyan ambassador.
        You are right in a way. 300 million Americans watching trash like Django Unchained and hundreds of violent movies like it, does not result in 300 million normally-adjusted Americans killing people. Guns don’t kill either.
        But on young impressionable boys, with mental health issues, living in a broken home with a single mother, there seems to be evidence that SOMETHING caused them to do it.

    • Tim Curtiss says:

      Oh, yeah, blame the Jews. Last I checked, Obama was not Jewish.

      • Obama was not Jewish

        Yeh, I’ve heard all that. Blame the ones who blame the Jews for anything.

        Obama is not Jewish

        Actually, nobody seems to know what Obama really is.

        “Immigration records show that Sen. Barack Obama’s grandfather, Baruch Heshy Obramowitz, was an Ethiopian “Falasha” Jew, who changed his surname when he moved to Kenya.”

        “Mark Okoth Obama Ndesandjo, Barack Obama’s half-brother is Jewish. His mother Ruth Nidesand was Jewish and with Barack Obama Sr. gave Obama his Jewish half brother.”

        “Capers C. Funnye Jr. (pronounced fu-NAY) is an African American who is the head rabbi of the mostly African-American 200 member Beth Shalom B’nai Zaken Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation of Chicago, Illinois. Funnye is the first cousin once removed of Michelle Obama, the wife of 44th United States President Barack Obama. Like most of his congregation, Rabbi Funnye was not born into Judaism; he adopted the religion later in life.”

        Obama was not elected by the Jews

        So says his Jewish campaign advisor David Axelrod and all the Jewish MSM who gave him a trillion dollars worth of free and friendly advertising, and the 70% of Jews who voted for him.

        Obama hates Jews

        As he appoints yet two more Jews to the Supreme Court to sit with the two Jews non-Jewish Bill Clinton appointed.

        As he appoints Jewish Ben Benanke to remain as head of the Federal Reserve.

        As he appoints Jewish Timothy Geithner to be the Treasury Secretary.

        As he appoints Jewish Rahm Emmanuel as his White House Chief of Staff.

        As he protects IsraHell with the Iron Dome missle defense system, but does not protect America with one.

  4. You really do need a large ammo capacity.

    Many of your shots may miss and even if you do hit the assailant, unless you hit him in the heart or brain, it may take several bullets before he is taken down. It gets worst if there are 3 or 4 assailants.

    So yes indeed, the more bullets the better your chance of survival.

  5. We don’t need gun control, we need government control.

    • LeSellers says:

      Sorry, but the II is nothing more than words until you and I pick up those weapons, as the militia, and coerce and compel the government (state, federal, local, it doesn’t matter) to obey the law.

      We can debate all day about whether the government should be controlled, but debate will not stop tyrants like O’bama, Brown, Cuomo, and their ilk. Only the power that comes from the barrel of a gun will put them back into the box.

      Yes, the II was given to us to protect the right to keep and bear (although it’s pretty much supercilious for that, since no constitution, state or federal gives any government the power to infringe our God-given right to keep and bear arms in self defence). But that’s not the real thrust of the II. The reason we have it is so that the states, using their militia, can stop federal tyranny. If you want your state to have “security”, it is necessary to have a well-trained (the meaning of the phrase “well regulated”) militia.

      When was the last time you or I went out onto the local parade ground and trained with the rest of the militia?

      Mr. O’bama, will there ever be any Jobs?

      • edodaniel says:

        Actually the Second Amendment came about in order to get the Constitution ratified as many of the states wouldn’t ratify if Congress wouldn’t incorporate the Bill of Rights. The Ratification Convention delegates were concerned with hunting, self defense, and protection of the state as well as prevention of a tyrannical Federal government.

        Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia said – “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” — Jefferson`s “Commonplace Book,” 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764

        George Mason, of Virginia said – “I consider and fear the natural propensity of rulers to oppress the people. I wish only to prevent them from doing evil. By these amendments I would give necessary powers, but no unnecessary power. If the clause stands as it is now, it will take from the state legislatures what divine Providence has given to every individual–the means of self-defence.” — Virginia`s U.S. Constitution ratification convention, 1788

        Thomas Paine, of Pennsylvania – “[A]rms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.” — Thoughts On Defensive War, 1775

        In 1833, Justice Joseph Story, appointed to the Supreme Court by our Constitution’s principal author, James Madison, wrote the following in his “Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States”: “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”

        • LeSellers says:

          I agree with all you posted.

          It doesn’t seem that anything you wrote contradicts anything in my earlier message.

          Arms are the last recourse against tyranny. The tyrants always try to limit the danger they face by restricting our access to that resort. The Founders and wise men since their time have recognized this and warned us against this inevitable trend. Your quotes are the tiniest sliver of the log of such statements and alarms. The question is not whether we have the right to keep and bear arms. The question is what we are going to do about it.

          Again I say we must establish viable militia because individuals are not going to resist the organized enemy we face. The state invariably has more guns, bigger guns and better guns than any of us will ever hope to own. Only as a militia do we have a chance of defeating their dreams of illegitimate lordship. “United, we stand; divided, we fall.”

          Mr. O’bama, will there ever be any Jobs?

  6. Who needs petty criminals violating the law on the carry of guns on school property, when we have real criminals violating the law of the Constitution which states that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?

  7. I love James O’Keefe. He has discovered that many people don’t want their private homes desginated as a gun free zone.

  8. The larger the magazine capacity, the higher the probability the shooter will survive any criminal assault.

  9. Rex Johnson says:

    Finally Harry Reid has somrthing right.

  10. johnnyu799 says:

    Governor Cuomo looked like Hitler ranting… arms flailing …screaming like a lunatic. watch the video all he needed was the arm band and mustache and German voice over…. he wants to be president take that guys guns away ….he’s scary

    • MudEngineer says:

      Coumo has sealed his fate in his bid to be President. He no longer has a snoballs change in he!! of being elected when 100+ million gun owners vote against him. He just shot himself in the foot, how ironic is that?

  11. Bristol says:

    What we really need is parents instilling honesty and values in their children. We also need role models such as parents, politicians, sports figures, actors, singers, etc. to stop lying and thinking that lying is ok to get ahead. People need to stop lying and cheating and asking forgiveness and all will be ok. Starts at home and with the role models … which includes all politicians.

  12. junkmailbin says:

    harry and the NRA are buddies plus his voters pack. It would seems that the gay arab is going to go it alone. Has congress suddenly grown a pair?? did the light come on that if they do not stand up and veto executive orders, they will become irrelevant

  13. brabbie2002 says:

    Het – Dirt Bag Harry must have heard from his mafia puppeteers that they are NOT going to turn in their weapons.

  14. tiredofO says:

    This may be the first intelligent thing Reid has come up with in 4 years! Of course it is NOT what he wants, . .it is him simply accepting the reality that the House is not as willing to blindly obey Obama as he is!

  15. gavinwca says:

    Harry Reid the graft fraud leader of the graft laden Senate. Who believes this lieing thief.