The Hill is famous for its really awful headlines, but this one could take the cake. Do they have any idea what they’ve written when they say Dems want to ban “semi-automatic firearms” and not qualifying it at all as to which semi-automatic firearms they’re referring to?
Nearly 200 House Democrats have signed onto a bill that would ban semi-automatic firearms and large-capacity magazines. https://t.co/4QjxVfTHHH
— The Hill (@thehill) August 14, 2019
The story is about an assault weapons ban, but they repeat that unqualified claim that reads like it’s all semi-automatic firearms in the body of the story as well:
And nearly 200 House Democrats have now signed on to legislation — authored by Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), the head of Democrats’ messaging operation — banning semi-automatic firearms and large-capacity magazines. With 198 co-sponsors, the bill is just 20 votes shy of the number needed to push it through the lower chamber.
For what it’s worth, here’s the bill they’re talking about and it doesn’t ban all semi-automatic firearms:
This piece is referring to H. R. 1296. It doesn't ban all semi-automatic firearms (which likely make up a large majority of guns currently owned by Americans). It does ban a lot of semi-automatic firearms, though. Here is the text: https://t.co/pX17dU5iyI https://t.co/hf7iZn7KDy
— Stephen Gutowski (@StephenGutowski) August 14, 2019
So, which is it?
Yeah, good luck with that.
I'm teetering between "they're so stupid they have no idea the vast majority of guns are semi-auto" and "oh, they know, and they don't care" https://t.co/AcCIo5Ghoz
— Krystle Baker (@TarheelKrystle) August 14, 2019
Oh, and it has no chance of passing anyway. From the NYT:
Still, an assault weapons ban has virtually no chance of being signed into law before 2021. Republicans, who hold the majority in the Senate, strongly oppose it, as does President Trump. Although nearly 200 House Democrats are backing legislation to reinstate the ban, that is not enough to pass even the Democrat-controlled House because voting on such a measure would be politically risky for vulnerable moderates.
***
Join the conversation as a VIP Member