Back in 1993, then House Representative (now Senator) Charles E. Schumer from New York was the primary sponsor of what became known as the “Federal Assault Weapons Ban” (Title XI, Sub. A of the larger “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994”).  Schumer’s Bill passed the House by only two votes (216-214).  As part of the larger Bill, the measure passed the House 235-195 and the Senate 61-38.  Former President Bill Clinton signed the Bill into law the same day it passed Congress, September 13, 1994.  Ten years later, on September 13, 2004, the assault weapons ban automatically expired. On Sunday morning’s “Meet the Press,” (12.16.12) Senator Diane Feinstein (CA, D) stated her intention to introduce a Bill in January 2013 to revitalize the ban.  She stated that her office was at work on the draft legislation and it would resemble the prior law, but also contain improvements.  {Note –  The reason for the delayed introduction is that it will coincide with the opening of the 113th Session of Congress.  All Bills not passed into law by the conclusion of the 112th, current session, automatically expire.} Briefly, the 1994 ban prohibited the manufacture for civilian use of 19 specifically named firearms (rifles, pistols, shotguns) deemed to meet a flow chart of criteria.  It was set up as a flowchart to deter the future manufacture of weapons with three or more of six features, including, but not limited to a flash suppressor or telescoping stock.  It also banned large capacity ammunition feeding devices defined at over 10 rounds.  And it required gun serial numbers to include the date of weapon manufacture. Just as there was no ban on the ownership or sale of such weapons made prior to the effective date of the ban, Sen. Feinstein stated yesterday she would anticipate future legislation to include the same type of “grandfathering” language. This is not the first time a Member of Congress has proposed such a ban.  In 2003, prior to the expiration of the ban, House Representative Carolyn McCarthy (NY-4, D) introduced legislation to extend the ban.  As with three other such attempts by Rep. McCarthy, the Bills did not clear an early stage of the House legislative process; the Bills did not clear the Committee.  Similar Senate measures, including a 2008 Bill proposed by Sen. Mark Kirk (IL, R) similarly didn’t leave Committee. It is important to note that several states currently have similar legislation as the 1994 federal ban on their books.  Indeed, some states passed bans as early as 1989, and some are more strident than the 1994 federal ban.