WASHINGTON (TheBlaze/AP) — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has decided that a proposed assault weapons ban won’t be part of a gun control bill the Senate plans to debate next month, the sponsor of the ban said Tuesday, a decision that means the ban stands little chance of survival.

Instead, Sen. Dianne Feinstein said she will be able to offer her ban on the military-style firearms as an amendment. Feinstein is all but certain to need 60 votes from the 100-member Senate to prevail, but she faces solid Republican opposition and likely defections from some moderate Democrats.

As The Atlantic puts it, “offering the assault weapons ban as an amendment means it would require its own vote — which would almost certainly fail.”

“I very much regret it,” Feinstein, D-Calif., told reporters of Reid’s decision. “I tried my best.”

Feinstein, an author of the 1994 assault weapons ban that expired after a decade, said that Reid, D-Nev., told her of the decision on Monday.

There are 53 Democrats in the Senate, plus two independents who usually vote with them. And as The Atlantic points out via Gallup, support for a measure such as Feinstein’s has waned:


Support for a ban on so-called “assault weapons” has waned. (Gallup via The Atlantic)

An assault-type weapon was used in the December massacre at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., that revived gun control as a top issue in Washington. Banning those firearms was among the proposals President Barack Obama made in January in response to those slayings.


.

The assault weapons ban was the most controversial of the major proposals to restrict guns that have been advanced by Obama and Senate Democrats. Because of that, it had been expected that the assault weapons measure would be left out of the initial package the Senate considers, with Democrats hoping the Senate could therefore amass the strongest possible vote for the overall legislation.

Having a separate vote on assault weapons might free moderate Democratic senators facing re-election next year in Republican-leaning states to vote against the assault weapons measure, but then support the remaining overall package of gun curbs.

Gun control supporters consider a strong Senate vote important because the Republican-run House has shown little enthusiasm for most of Obama’s proposals.

Feinstein said Reid told her there will be two votes.

One would be on her assault weapons ban, which also includes a ban on ammunition magazines that carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The second would just be on prohibiting the high-capacity magazine clips.

Many Democrats think the ban on large-capacity magazines has a better chance of getting 60 votes than the assault weapons ban.

The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved four gun control measures this month, including Feinstein’s barring so-called assault weapons and high capacity magazines. The others would expand required federal background checks for firearms buyers, increase federal penalties for illegal gun trafficking and boost school safety money.

I would love to see a Assault The Government With Weapons Day wherein everyone who has an assault weapon or even wants one all meet on Capital Hill one fine day and with bandoliers for the MAG's and extra large ammo clips for all the automatic weapons shoot your way into the House and Senate chambers and just hose them all down til no one is left moving. Then have a party. Hell, why not, it's what many really want to do anyway....

I'm disappointed that common sense legislation cannot be enacted in order to reduce the instances of military-type assault weapons from getting into the hands of current and future criminals. I find this tragic. Obviously I support the rights of law-abiding gun owners to maintain their fire arms, but restrictions have to be made for such dangerous weaponry.

I'm disappointed that common sense legislation cannot be enacted in order to reduce the instances of military-type assault weapons from getting into the hands of current and future criminals. I find this tragic. Obviously I support the rights of law-abiding gun owners to maintain their fire arms, but restrictions have to be made for such dangerous weaponry.

I'm disappointed that common sense legislation cannot be enacted in order to reduce the instances of military-type assault weapons from getting into the hands of current and future criminals. I find this tragic. Obviously I support the rights of law-abiding gun owners to maintain their fire arms, but restrictions have to be made for such dangerous weaponry.

All of this is a moot point when 3-printers will be able to print guns in your own home. There is already a company preparing to print guns so that gun will be "readily available."

The future might see a civil war, and trust me on this, there will be guns EVERYWHERE.

Those printed guns will still be illegal if they violate the terms of the gun control. No law can completely remove illegal guns from the hands of the public, or even the streets. It's just another way to help lower the availability of them, and give police another means to regulate them.

As the law stands now, a thug gets stopped with assault rifles in the trunk of their car, the police have to let them keep those weapons. After the ban, the police can take them away and fine/jail those same thugs.

If by Thug you mean a Criminal, they are Disallowed Guns of Any Kind.

Those printed guns will still be illegal if they violate the terms of the gun control. No law can completely remove illegal guns from the hands of the public, or even the streets. It's just another way to help lower the availability of them, and give police another means to regulate them.

As the law stands now, a thug gets stopped with assault rifles in the trunk of their car, the police have to let them keep those weapons. After the ban, the police can take them away and fine/jail those same thugs.

Those printed guns will still be illegal if they violate the terms of the gun control. No law can completely remove illegal guns from the hands of the public, or even the streets. It's just another way to help lower the availability of them, and give police another means to regulate them.

As the law stands now, a thug gets stopped with assault rifles in the trunk of their car, the police have to let them keep those weapons. After the ban, the police can take them away and fine/jail those same thugs.