Posted on 12/18/2012 5:17:30 AM PST by Kaslin
On Friday, a heavily armed young man walked into a Connecticut elementary school and murdered 20 first-graders and six adults before he killed himself. Even in a country inured to gun violence, this crime is too heinous to contemplate.
Now the question is: Does Washington pass a bad law just to do something, anything, even something that doesn't enhance public safety?
I write this as a former assault-weapons ban supporter, who observed that the 1994 federal assault-weapons ban, which expired in 2004, didn't reduce gun violence in America. Nor, apparently, did Connecticut's assault-weapons ban, passed in 1993 and still in force.
The New York Times reports that all three guns -- a Glock and a Sig Sauer handgun and a .223 Bushmaster semiautomatic rifle -- brought by the shooter to Sandy Hook Elementary School were "legally acquired and registered" by the shooter's mother, who was his first victim.
The Sandy Hook shooter used 30-round clips, which were illegal under the 1994 federal law -- except that old large-capacity magazines were exempt. The Washington Post reports there were 24 million such magazines in private hands at the time the law passed.
A University of Pennsylvania study of the federal assault-weapons law found that while gun violence declined during its 10-year existence, "We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence."
It's been my experience that the more people support bans like the 1994 assault-weapons law, the less they know about guns. They often use the term "semiautomatic" as if it were synonymous with "assault weapon." They couldn't pick out an "assault weapon" in a firearms line up.
They say they don't want to mess with the rights of gun owners, but if the gun-control lobby manages to pass laws that limit high-power weapons, it then will try to ban "junk guns" -- or cheap guns.
Over the weekend, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the author of the 1994 federal ban, said that on the first day of the new Congress she will introduce an updated assault-weapons ban, which specifically would ban the .223 Bushmaster. A press release explained that her new bill would ban the "sale of more than 100 assault weapons" and limit clips to 10 rounds, while protecting "gun owners by exempting more than 900 specific hunting and sporting weapons."
The problem: No law can do both things well.
I'm all for limiting clip rounds to 10 bullets and closing background-check loopholes. But judging by the press release, Feinstein's new bill looks like another gun bill that has the potential to reduce the death toll in a mass shooting -- obviously a good thing -- but at a cost.
The cost is that law-abiding gun owners, and those who are not so law-abiding, are going to run out and buy guns and bullets, pronto. They see a bunch of politicians, who don't know guns, about to mess with their right to self-protection. And it doesn't make them feel safer. Me either.
I don’t think they’re going to limit themselves to the prohibitions in the old law. I expect the whole camel under the tent, not just the nose.
“she will introduce an updated assault-weapons ban, which specifically would ban the .223 Bushmaster”
Whew!
Fortunately, mine is a 5.56 and it’s stamped “multi-calibre”
When these idiots are done, everything this side of a butter knife will be labeled an “assault weapon”.
The original “Assault Weapons Ban” did absolutely nothing to ban assault weapons. Making a few cosmetic changes like removing the bayonet lug doesn’t do anything to change muzzle velocity. It was typical liberal feel-good legislation. I have a Colt AR-15 A2 that I purchased during the ban and it functions exactly the same as my post-ban Bushmaster M-4.
Saunders’ basic anti-freedom nature is revealed. Looks like TownHall can open up some web space for another writer...
Here is a legislative proposal:
Let the teachers at each school decide if they want to arm. Couple this with school vouchers so parents can decide if they want their kids going to an armed school or gun free school. If teachers do not want to arm then parents should be allowed to volunteer.
Great platform for 2014!
Do you remember the extensive list from the last prohibition? What a morass of crap. Plus all the add ons. Probably add lasers this time and red-dot scopes. EoTecs? Front sights? Accessory rails? Trigger pull requirements? Any composite components? Flashlight attachments over 50 lumens. The list could go on and on. All of which are irrelevant and make no difference what so ever. Kind of like the bill didn’t make any difference for 10 years the last time it was floated. And yet, these bufoons keep getting back in office. The devil you know syndrome I guess. Must be nice to live in the rareified world they live in. Just think, they used to work for us. Just as the actions of this punk were overboard, the resulting knee jerk reaction is also overboard. Gun show in Reno this weekend. Betting the turnout will be big.
Share the lead.
Voluntary plus they would get to spend a couple of weeks at Front Sight training. Pretty sure Dr. P would come up with a great program at a reduced rate.
Helping keep mankind warm for 65 years.
“I don’t think they’re going to limit themselves to the prohibitions in the old law. I expect the whole camel under the tent, not just the nose.”
Obama is going to pull the “Fast and Furious” card and blame Republicans for the fiasco.
I got 5 bucks on that. Anyone?
We are on an out of control ship taken over by fools, installed by fools and navigated by fools.
They recognize neither past history or incidences....and as such have doomed us to their insanity.
The likely outcome of all this discussion of "gun control" is that the next incident committed by a KNOWN lunatic will be met with "we have not done enough" and on and on.
One way to end this madness, sadly, would be that one side utterly and completely wipes out the other side....reasoned arguments, gentle persuasion and passionate debate are clearly not working.
The gun control freaks are prepared to start eating.
So do they want to ban the same weapons that our federal goverment gave to the Mexican drug cartels?
You can bet that the "new and improved" law will be all-inclusive, ensuring that any semi-auto weapon, probably with a non-removable magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds for riles, 3 rounds for shotguns. Rather than focusing on aesthetics, they'll focus on the operation of the weapons. Of course, they'll also make it illegal to have scary looking guns too.
Mark
A question for Sen. Feinstein: Other than twisted liberal vengeance, why are you picking on the .223 Bushmaster? That you are doing this exposes your complete lack of knowledge on the subject. As much as it might pain you, why not go get some education on the matter instead of appearing to be a complete lunatic?
Considering that the "assault weapon ban" was tried once before and that there are studies indicating it had little, if any, affect on gun violence, I'm tempted to quote Einstein to you, Ma'am. You know, the one about the definition of stupidity.
Before the ban, 45 ACP had its enthusiasts, mainly using the 1911 pistol. But when magazines were limited to only 10 rounds, a 9mm pistol that could hold up to 14 or more rounds, now had empty space in their magazines. So, If you can only have 10 rounds, might as well fill those magazines with the largest caliber commonly available - the 45ACP. Gun manufacturers then met the demand by making various pistols available in 45. And if you are going to shoot 45, why not shoot a model 1911?
I own several pistols in 45 ACP I purchased under the AWB. If we have another AWB that limits magazine size, maybe this time the firearms industry will develop a 50 cal. pistol round!!
"I'm all for limiting clip rounds to 10 bullets...."
Huh? Sounds like she's still an anti-gunner at heart.
What you’ve identified is the resulting confussion is INTENTIONAL!
Even though your weapon is compliant, they will have to confiscate it to “evaluate it”.
Will they acknowledge the difference between a .223 and my 5.56?
You might get it back in 3 years.
Abortionist George Tiller murdered over 60,000 babies without using a gun. A gun was used to stop him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.