“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste” 
Rahm Emanuel, Nov 19, 2008

“In January, Senator Feinstein will introduce a bill to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices.”
Senator Feinstein, December 17, 2012

Senator Feinstein’s statement above, on her web site, is not exactly the full and honest truth.   After reading the bill, one can only conclude that her gun ban objective is not about banning fully automatic machine guns used by the military as the thrust of her words seem to imply.

And, it is hard to imagine that her legislation will actually result in effectively addressing the underlying issues associated with preventing mass killings.  In fact, such intuitively may rise as more law abiding citizens are disarmed.

And, her bill is not just a renewal of the 1994 assault weapons ban.  Instead, her bill is an extremely far-reaching and unprecedented expansion of that now defunct law.

Read the bill directly from her web site:
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons

THE FACTS:

Senator Feinstein is not trying to ban machine guns or take guns away from criminals.  Machine guns are already banned from manufacture, import and the like.  Criminals have guns because criminals ignore laws, and this is just another one they will ignore.

Senator Feinstein’s bill is so extreme and expansive, that ordinary small caliber target rifles need to be specifically exempted because such gets caught up in her new liberal definition of a “Military Style Assault Weapon.” 

For example, the small caliber target rifle shown below needs an exemption.  This gun clearly is not “Military Style”, but it is included in her narrative definition!  Is such just misspoken political rhetoric in her quote above, or just a deliberate lie to sell the bill to the uninformed citizenry?

You must decide this for yourself by reading the bill.

22 target

THE POLITICAL CALCULUS:

The politics of the bill are fairly obvious.  The pervasive progressive media propagates the bill as a tool to end the proliferation of “assault weapons”, presumably to prevent or minimize future mass killings.

Rarely of mention in the press is that the narrative definition of this bill is ambiguous and contradictory.  As a result, the bill needs to exempt over 2,200 weapons because they are clearly not assault weapons.  But they fit the narrative!  Hello?

Accordingly, there is little doubt that an underlying Saul Alinsky process is in play: (a) obscure the full thrust, intent and negative aspects of the legislation; and (b) give more liberty and freedoms to the government, without any credible proof.  The game plan: a lie told often enough may eventually be accepted as a truth.

THE CONSTITUTION:

Then, there is the fact that this bill is unconstitutional.  If Senator Feinstein wanted to do this according to the Constitution, and be loyal to the oath of office she took to uphold the Constitution, she should have filed a Constitutional amendment modifying the Second Amendment via Article V.   see: http://constitutionus.com/

Why did she avoid what is prescribed by the Constitution?

The answer is simple – it would never get ratified.

Instead, Senator Feinstein simply ignored the Constitution as progressive Democrats have done since Roosevelt.  Acts that, over a long period, have plunged us into unsustainable debt and insidiously striped citizens of their God given rights to freedom and liberty.

The Second Amendment is not about hunting.  It is about government tyranny and a citizen’s right to defend themselves.

All one needs to do is to look at the history of the Constitution or at the founders discussions of the Second Amendment in the Federalist papers for a start.  There is no mention of hunting or a requirement to get a license to exercise a right.

The Second Amendment’s “right of the people to keep and bear arms” is the only right with the qualifier “which shall not be infringed.”  The intent of such words is unmistakable.
See: http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Moncure1.html

If one were from another planet upon actually reading the Constitution, one might logically conclude that the Senator does not even suspect we have a Constitution which indeed limits the powers of Congress in this regard

Did you ever wonder why Congress has a low approval rating?

Look no further than this unconstitutional legislation, notwithstanding the fact that it makes absolutely no claim to actually solving the gun violence problem created by criminals.

Instead, Senator Feinstein wants to disarm law abiding citizens and abuse their Second Amendment rights, and further expand the potential for criminals to take advantage of a potential new paradigm of “killing fields” created by disarming only law abiding citizens.

MAJOR CHANGES FROM THE 1994 EXPIRED GUN BAN:

By changing the “TWO” metric, which was in the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban definition, to “ONE“, thousands of guns are added to the list of “Military Style Assault Weapon”s.

The “forward grip” which Senator Feinstein added, made virtually every hunting rifle a “Military Style Assault Weapon.”  The purpose of which is undoubtedly to establish a list of guns that the Congress needs to approve of every time a new gun tries to make it to the marketplace.

This predictably will be the genesis of the progressive’s plan to eventually ban all rifles, except those in the hands of the government, or those that Congress will let you have.  The Second Amendment becomes a casualty of politics.

If you own a “grandfathered” weapon, you will also need to pay a federal fee established by the Attorney General, not Congress, to give your gun to a family member.

“Military Style Assault Weapon’s” with the “threaded barrel” and/or “barrel shroud” typically supports the use of perfectly legal flash/noise suppressors that are used at many target ranges to reduce noise to the neighbors.  This adversely affects target and hunting clubs and likely will drive up complaints from neighbors of gun clubs.  If you only had this feature on your pistol, the previous ban would not have applied. This ban would include these pistols.

IN SUMMARY:

Senator Feinstein wants to ban guns – as many as possible, and ultimately put gun manufacturers out of business, and attack gun clubs, and further depreciate the gun rights guaranteed to citizens by the United States Constitution.

Whether or not you own a gun, want to own a gun or don’t even consider getting one is irrelevant to this discussion.  If you want to prevent Congress from abusing the Bill of Rights for a class of citizens, gun owners in this case, then stand up now and be heard.  Otherwise, you, I or your neighbor will be next to lose a little liberty and freedom, one step at a time, when gun owners don’t care after you tacitly helped take their rights away.

“People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.”
Benjamin Franklin

 ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN of 2013:

Senator Feinstein’s own words are the best proof of the foregoing remarks.  The following words are from bill, pages 2-4:

“The term ‘semiautomatic assault weapon’ means any of the following, regardless of country of manufacture or caliber of ammunition accepted:

(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable
magazine and any two one of the following:
(i)   A pistol grip.
(ii)  A forward grip.
(iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
(iv)  A grenade launcher or rocket launcher.
(v)   A barrel shroud.
(vi)  A threaded barrel.

(B) A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to
accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device
designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber
rim fire ammunition.

(C) Any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or
accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire
of a semiautomatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into
a machine gun.

(D) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable
magazine and any two one of the following:
(i)   A threaded barrel.
(ii)  A second pistol grip.
(iii) A barrel shroud.
(iv)  The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location
outside of the pistol grip.
(v)   A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.

(E) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity
to accept more than 10 rounds.

(F) A semiautomatic shotgun that has any of the following:
(i)   A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
(ii)  A pistol grip.
(iii) A fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds.
(iv)  The ability to accept a detachable magazine.
(v)   A forward grip.
(vi)  A grenade launcher or rocket launcher.

(G) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.”

Copyright © January 27, 2013 – David F.  Delorey, Jr.