Senator Dianne Feinstein Introduces Assault Weapons Ban
On Thursday, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) introduced a proposal to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. The bill faces an uphill battle to congressional passage. No Republican lawmakers were in the room when she proposed her bill. The bill would go further than the 1994 assault weapon ban (which expired in 2004) in that it would prohibit the sale, import and manufacture of more than 150 weapons—including the Bushmaster rifle used in the Newtown school shooting. It would also ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.
It is important to note for those worrying their guns will be taken away that those who legally own assault weapons would be allowed to keep them. Buyers of currently owned assault weapons would be subject to criminal background checks. Sen. Feinstein said: “No weapon is taken from anyone. The purpose is to dry up the supply of these weapons over time.”
The Chicago Tribune reports that even though “Feinstein dropped the idea of requiring owners of assault weapons to register their firearms, her proposal quickly drew criticism from the National Rifle Association.”
The NRA said in a statement:
“Sen. Feinstein has been trying to ban guns from law-abiding citizens for decades. It’s disappointing but not surprising that she is once again focused on curtailing the Constitution instead of prosecuting criminals or fixing our broken mental health system. The American people know gun bans do not work and we are confident Congress will reject Sen. Feinstein’s wrongheaded approach.”
I’m not sure where I begin with the ridiculousness of this statement. I’m starting to think some people are illiterate, deaf or delusional. The Senator emphatically said no one’s guns would be taken away from them. She is by no means advocating a ban on all guns. There is no practical or good reason why assault weapons should be sold or even manufactured. As I have posted, assault weapons should be banned.
You don’t need them to hunt. You don’t need them to protect yourself. You can do those things with shotguns and handguns. The fact that weapons used in the Iraq War are legally sold in this country is dumbfounding.
I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that Sen. Feinstein will not only encounter resistance from the GOP, but from her own part as well. That is the reason the ban expired in 2004. Many Democrat leaders have A or B ratings from the NRA. Some think that the bill if first introduced in the Democratically led Senate wouldn’t pass.
If you think that assault weapons should NOT be banned, please give a rational explanation as to why. Because I don’t understand how this infringes your Constitutional right.
Email: realtalkdebate2012@gmail.com
Twitter: @adrakontaidis & @talkrealdebate
12 responses to “Senator Dianne Feinstein Introduces Assault Weapons Ban”
Trackbacks / Pingbacks
- February 2, 2013 -
- February 10, 2013 -
- February 15, 2013 -
- February 25, 2013 -
- March 20, 2013 -
- April 19, 2013 -
I haven’t seen too much out there as to how many loopholes are in this bill. I know we’ve talked about this, but unfortunately the old ban didn’t actually do anything due to loopholes. I bought my AR-15 during the ban. Have you seen anything about that?
I was looking forward to your commentary on this particular topic, since you clearly have more knowledge on the past bill and differences of the weapons. From what I’ve read so far it seems like those loopholes would be closed. So I am happy that they’ve learned from past mistakes. I could be wrong though. Haven’t had enough time to read the bill.
That’s good news.
on an unrelated topic have you been able to embed youtube videos on your posts…I’m having some trouble doing that for a couple days now..
I haven’t had any trouble. I just copy and paste the URL directly from the browser bar. Is that what you do?
Yes, but now it doesn’t work since Friday.
I’ve had to copy the embed code and post that directly to my post.