More Democratic 2020 Candidates Are Backing An Assault Weapons Ban | The 11th Hour | MSNBC

An assault weapons ban is gaining traction with Democratic candidates after two mass shootings. But can Nancy Pelosi get a ban passed in the House? Former Republican David Jolly joins.
» Subscribe to MSNBC:

MSNBC delivers breaking news, in-depth analysis of politics headlines, as well as commentary and informed perspectives. Find video clips and segments from The Rachel Maddow Show, Morning Joe, Meet the Press Daily, The Beat with Ari Melber, Deadline: White House with Nicolle Wallace, Hardball, All In, Last Word, 11th Hour, and more.

Connect with MSNBC Online
Visit msnbc.com:
Subscribe to MSNBC Newsletter:
Find MSNBC on Facebook:
Follow MSNBC on Twitter:
Follow MSNBC on Instagram:

More Democratic 2020 Candidates Are Backing An Assault Weapons Ban | The 11th Hour | MSNBC

49 comments

  1. AR does not mean “assault rifle”. This is a little psyop they use on people to make semi automatic rifles sound evil & scary.
    AR stands for “Armalite Rifle”.

    1. @Carl Brutananadilewski I’ve seen comments already with people talking about their assault weapons, their words not mine

    2. @The Nard Dog you just used a different term than daisy and harshbarj though. you said “assault weapon” they said “assault rifle” and those are 2 different things. according to assault weapons bills, basically any semi auto rifle is an “assault weapon” but an “assault rifle” is a select fire rifle, which are basically already banned. assault weapon is a made up term to demonize semi auto rifles. its just a fact. if they didnt want to cloak their intentions they would call the bill’s “a semi auto rifle ban” rather than an “assault weapons ban”
      when someone hears the word “assault weapon” they think full auto, and the media regularly uses the term “assault weapon” and “assault rifle” to describe semi auto rifles. they are trying to fool the sheep. if they were to claim, “hey we are going to ban your semi auto .22 squirrel hunting rifle” way fewer people would agree to it, so they must cloak it as an “assault weapons ban”

    1. Not fast enough……. The left and their Globalist masters have already trashed Europe. We are supposed to be next…

  2. sorry, but a bunch of people calling for a ban on something they are severely uneducated on is hardly legitimate

    1. @The Nard Dog you must really have a fun life. Do you deliver pizza for a living? I know your liberal arts degree was expensive.

    1. Thats such a stupid argument. Might as well get rid of every law then, because criminals will break it anyway.

    1. Some Guy : That’s the GOP for you. If the biggest Lobby Group in Trump’s orbit is going to keep BUYING policy, they will end up shooting themselves in the foot. If they remain triggered, on EVERY SINGLE aspect of gun safety, Control, legislation, they will be run roughshod over in the end. I don’t want to lose my guns. But, the NRA will end up forcing America’s hand . . . Smh

    2. @ruth depew If I had to wager a guess, I’d say Some Guy is referencing the people advocating an assault weapons ban in this video.

    3. @Peter Bills If I had to wager, I’d say, i’m fed up with the folk who don’t take the time to see if their comment even identifies the side of the fence where they reside.

    4. ruth depew he’s right I thought it was obvious. an “assault weapon” ban wouldn’t have any effect. Banning high capacity magazines will have no effect. The Vast Majority of gun homicides are from handguns… virtually almost all guns in the USA are semiautomatic which isn’t the same as automatic (those are illegal).

      The same weekend the El Paso shooting happened there were 2 mass shootings in Chicago killing 7 wounding 40… msnbc and cnn will never cover that though because it goes against the narrative. Handguns were used, black people shooting other black people, in a city with some of the strictest gun laws in the country.

      This debate is extremely disingenuous and isn’t based in facts.

    1. @Gage Westerhouse True. They got their way before, but the results were non existent. It’s actually a tough sell now.

    2. @James Allen yeah, but you know how it works. The rationale will be “well, that ban just didn’t go far enough”.

    3. @Gage Westerhouse Yep. That’s the standard logic. Sort of like ‘that wasn’t real Socialism. It will work this time!’ It will be interesting to see how this plays out. It just means, as far as I’m concerned, I need to buy something they are going to ban before it gets banned.

    1. James Allen : Tell that to Trump? He feels, “assaulted,” every time they have to tell him how wrong he is, every day . . . 😁

    2. Democrats know. They just don’t want to let a tragedy go to waste, so they’ll continue to try to strip the civil rights of Americans as they have been doing for well over a century.

    3. @mtwdewlover when they banned assault weapons in the 90’s it was a complete waste of time. They said no pistol grips so the manufacturers produced the same weapon with a keyhole stock, they banned flame spreaders but the guns shot the very same bullet, they banned bayonet lugs but the bullet that came out the end was the same, they banned high capacity magazines but there are a about a zillion of those in circulation so the price just went up. Assault weapon bullets, believe it or not, are less powerful than most hunting calibers. If they ban the common assault calibers then someone will build a weapon with a different bullet caliber. If they say no military type weapons then someone will point out the civilian versions do not have select fire (full automatic) and in some cases the bullets are different and of lower chamber pressures (5.56x 45 nato vs. .223). Then after 10 years or so the ATF determined there was no significant reduction in crime do to the ban. Complete waste of time.

  3. Yet California still has a gun problem, even though we don’t have high capacity magazines!

    1. @dirt bag the last couple shooters got them legal. I’m really surprised they aren’t focusing more on that. Background checks are absolutely going to be expanded to social media so anything you have written years ago will be used against you!

  4. This is ridiculous to even consider, it has no statistical evidence to support it. If my family is in a situation where a criminal is threatening their life I hope there is a CPL holder with the training to confront the criminal and neutralize the threat.

  5. 2nd amendment is in danger you say? How is that not even more reason to buy guns and ammo? The whole point of the 2nd is protection from tyrannical government.

  6. Do You notice all the politicians calling for gun control only talk about taking away guns from legal gun owners and not from criminals.

    1. In the metropolitan city closest to me, criminals who are arrested and charged with multiple violations that include a gun crime, ie felon in possesion of a firearm, most often have that charge dropped or dismissed during a plea deal. The laws on the books aren’t enforced.

  7. So if Dem candidates continuously back all the policies in all the same way, who’s the sheep and who’s the leader?

  8. If these candidates keep using skewed fake firearms data instead of the FBI stats it’s going to bite them in the butt

  9. He he he … more lost votes for Democrats! Never interfere when your enemy is in a self destructive mode!!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.