"No Weapon Is Taken From Anyone":

Feinstein on assault weapons ban: “No weapon is taken from anyone” - Salon.com:
(January 24, 2013)

Legislatures can do only one thing: make laws.  They don't solve problems, they don't resolve crises, they don't stop crime.  They only punish.  Too often, the people they punish are the only ones who respect the law.

This is the story of a Lawmaker who has long ago quit trying for "right", but now only wants to preserve her office by seeming to be "Doing Something" while she is in office:

 In a press conference Thursday, Democrats unveiled a new version of the assault weapons ban that they will introduce into the House and Senate, which includes a ban on 158 specifically named military-style firearms. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who sponsored the Senate version of the bill and who worked on the assault weapons ban from the ’90s that expired in 2004, said in her remarks that this will be a “tough battle,” but she is “incensed that our weak gun laws allow these mass killings to be carried out again and again and again in this country.”

Yes, this original article was published over 18 months ago.

It's offered here as a reminder that the Gun Grabbers will never, NEVER give up!

(And they call ME paranoid!)
_______________________________________________________________

The legislation specifically prohibits 158 types of military-grade firearms, as well as other semi-automatic rifles, handguns and shotguns that can have a detachable magazine and have at least one military characteristic. As Feinstein explained, the 1994 version of the law had a two-characteristic test for a weapon to be banned, but that was “too easy to work around.

Is this a reference to the 1994-2004 "Compromise" legislation, which was only enacted if a "Sunset Provision" which allowed the gun/magazine ban to be deleted if (after ten years) it was found to have no effect on the "Violent Crime Rate"?

Yes, it is!

The problem with the 1994 gun ban, according to Senator Feinstein, was that it was "too easy to work around".  In other words, it was insufficiently strict.



In 2013, DiFi had a better idea:  but it sounded as if it was the same old thing, presented in the same old way.  Except, maybe, she thought that making TWO "characteristics of a Military-grade Firearm" asthe measure of a "Military Grade" firearm was too demanding.

Was she proposing that only a single characteristic was sufficient?  A pistol-grip stock?  A "flash-hider"?

Not quite so simple to understand:

Feinstein also emphasized that the ban will not affect weapons for hunting and sporting, and protects “2,200 specifically named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes. They are, by make and model, exempted from the legislation.” She added: “No weapon is taken from anyone. The purpose is to dry up the supply of these weapons over time. Therefore there is no sunset on this bill.”

(Emphasis added)

"No Weapon Is Taken From Anyone?"Bullshit!

Obviously, DiFi had it clear in her own mind that the issues which torpedoed her 1994 Gun Ban must be avoided.  Do the politics of Gun Confiscation weigh heavily on her mind?  Was this a Political Event, rather than a Societal Enhancement?

You Decide ... and join me in laughing at her transparent attempt to confiscate all firearms which don't meet her personal criteria as 'safe', while reassuring gun owners that "We Will Not Take Away Your Guns!"

(... and they called ME paranoid!)

Adding Insult to Injury:

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., who will introduce the House version, and whose husband was killed in a shooting on the Long Island Railroad in 1993, said in the press conference that “this battle has been a very lonely battle for many, many years.
“Some people will say this bill won’t work. Let me tell you why it will work. Because if you don’t have these guns and the large magazines on the shelves, those who have done these horrific killings wouldn’t be able to go to a gun store and just buy them. They don’t have the background to look to the black market,” she said.

[emphasis added]

So, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), arguably one of the most inane members of parliament Congress, considers that firearms owners .... Neanderthals that we are ... aren't smart enough to find illegal sources of firearms?

It's significant that she equates "Legal Gun Owners" with "Illegal Gun Owners", while at the same time revealing that her target is not those who are legal with the illegal.

To her, it's all the same; except that, the illegals will still get guns no matter what laws are passed.  Consequently, the only possible effect of more "gun control laws" is to restrict access from legal gun owners.

She KNOWS that the crooks, the hoodlums, the gang-bangers will pay no attention to any laws which the Federal Government might pass.  She's apparently fine with that; she just wants to take YOUR guns.

Oh, but "No Weapon Is Taken From Anyone"!

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., who used to represent the district that encompasses Newtown, said in his remarks that “kids would be alive today in Newtown, Conn., if the law that we’re proposing today were in place.” He pointed to data that showed a two-thirds drop in gun violence during the time the old law was in place,  and that “the first assault weapons ban, even with its warts, worked.”

Excuse me, EX-Senator Chris?

Adam Lanza killed his mother and stole her firearms from her gun safe.  Other than that he apparently was able to circumvent the security (simply a key?  We don't know how he did that) ...

... exactly which laws were Adam Lanza demonstrably reluctant to break, in order to carry out his agenda?  Let me see: Matricide?  No problem.  Theft?  A technicality.  The odds that he would offend Senator Feinstein,  Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, and Senator Chris Murphy?  Probably never even crossed his mind.

The option of killing dozens of innocent children?  That was icing on the cake for him.  Apparently Members of Congress have not considered that some people are just EVIL, and no matter how many laws the Members might propose, they have ABSOLUTELY NO EFFECT on the actions of people who are crazy, deranged .. evil.  (But these same elected officials will certainly deny that EVIL exists, because they haven't yet managed to enact a law against EVIL.)

Oh, I'm tired.

Tired of the posturing of politicians, and tired of the posturing of murderers.  Mostly, I think the politicians are the worst of the bunch.

Murderers .... I know it will sound as if I am minimizing the grievous loss, but I'm not ... kill dozens.

They are like the Tse-Tse fly, which affects individuals.

Politicians are more like a plague upon the body politic, which affects thousands, millions, because their efforts result in thousands of deaths because (had this bill been allowed to fester) would have resulted in the disarmament of lawful firearms owners ... but would have deliberately had NO effect on the criminals which predate on the rest of us.

Had Diane Feinstein or Carolyn McCarthy .. or the spear-carrier Chris Murphy, for that matter ... proposed a single LAW which would have the effect of truly protecting America's Children, most of us would have been behind them in a New York Minute.

Unfortunately, all they can think of is to restrict the ability of law-abiding people to protect themselves, their homes, and their families.

Why am I so tired?

Because the problem with law-makers is that they only have one arrow in their quiver:  they make laws that will only be honored by the law-abiding.

What we need is a way to make the law-breakers behave.

And t hat will NEVER happen.

So what the heck good are they doing, when all they do is punish the people who aren't part of the Problem, but part of the Solution?
x
x