Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) must be either insane, stupid, or perhaps both. She was successful in ramming through an “assault weapons ban” [read “I don’t like the way they look, never mind functional differences or similarities”] in 1994 — thanks in large part to the assistance of Jack Brooks, Bob Dole, and the Necrotic Republican Apologists (NRA). Ten years after, that paragon of truthfulness and full disclosure, the “US Government”, allowed as how the ban had done: not less than expected, not very little, but nothing — repeat nothing — to affect violent crime.
So, a reasonable person would think, that was a bad idea; let’s try something else. But we do not speak of reasonable people; we speak of the “United States Senate”. And so, today, Senator Feinstein introduced an “Assault Weapons Ban (mod 2)”. It names 150 weapons, for which the manufacture, sale, or import would be prohibited, as well as magazines that hold more than ten rounds. Unlike the previous ban, which limited “assault weapons” to two of several “ugly gun” features (none of which having anything to do with lethality, mind you), this bill limits this class of detachable magazine weapons to “one or more” of such pseudo-deadly mods as a pistol grip or a folding stock.
Originally, the ban was to register (or confiscate) the listed weapons ‘ex post facto’; but now Her Benevolence will “allow” current owners to keep their banned firearms, after submitting to a criminal background check. (Gee, doesn’t that sound like back-door registration to you?)
Said Feinstein: “We have tried to recognize the right of a citizen to legally possess a weapon … No weapon is taken from anyone. The purpose is to dry up the supply of these weapons over time.”
Folks, if that ain’t infringement, I don’t know what is!
One further thought: it strikes me that this might be the ‘sacrificial lamb’ legislation that the Progressives will use to enact other, seemingly lesser infringements. This one dies, with wailing and gnashing of teeth, and then the “Progressives” insist that “compromise” dictates that their other measures receive bi-partisan support.
If I trusted Repugnicans (and I emphatically do not!), I’d expect a brutal death in the House. But then, I expected the original ban to die unborn, as it should have, until the back room door closed, and the deal was done. This time around, it is incumbent on every individual, regardless of party affiliation, who is sentient enough to recognize that appeals to emotion are not a rational argument for unconstitutional actions, to stand up and say “No!” to their Representatives and Senators.
It’s not just the right to keep and bear arms that’s at stake here. It’s time to take a stand on this and every other rights infringement. If it’s not too late for the republic, the shadow is certainly on the door.