The ignorance and historical disconnection of Sen. Diane Feinstein's bill to ban "assault" weapons was carefully dissected by Second Amendment attorney Dave Kopel in his testimony to the full US Senate Judiciary Committee on Jan. 30. His written submission is here in PDF.
SummaryRemember, boys and girls. This is an "assault weapon:"
Senator Feinstein’s proposed ban on so-called “assault weapons” is not based on how fast the guns fire, or how powerful they are.
Instead, the bans are based on superficial features, such as an adjustable stock, or a forward grip.
The features are not “military” features. Rather, they make the gun more accurate, or more comfortable, for a particular user. These are positive features, not negative ones.
It is inaccurate to claim that magazines holding more than 10 rounds are “high capacity.” Rather, they are standard for a vast number of handguns, and for many rifles.
Police and law-abiding citizens choose semi-automatic handguns, and rifles such as the AR-15, for the same reason: they are often the best choices for the lawful defense of self and others. To assert that such firearms are only meant for mass murder is a libel against law-abiding civilians and law enforcement. It is malicious hate speech.
A Department of Justice study found that Senator Feinstein’s 1994-2004 had no statistically discernible benefits. A close analysis of her 2013 bill indicates that the bill would be equally useless.
Great Britain shows the perils of mass gun confiscation: higher violent crime rates than the United States, and an especially high rate of home invasion burglaries.
A steadily increasing rate of gun ownership in the United States in recent decades (today, there are more guns than Americans) has been accompanied by sharply declining violent crime. Today, Americans are safer from violent crime than any time since the early 1960s.
Congress has repeatedly outlawed federal gun registration because of the accurate recognition that in other countries, and in the United States, gun registration is a tool for gun confiscation.
Michael Bloomberg’s bills for “universal background checks” have always had provisions for gun registration, and many other violations of the civil liberties of law-abiding persons—such as persons who were falsely accused of drug crimes, or sexual minorities who were improperly ordered to undergo counseling.
Universal background checks are unenforceable without universal gun registration. The attempt to impose universal gun registration in Canada was such a fiasco that the registration law was repealed in 2012.
Armed defenders have repeatedly stopped incipient mass murders, including at schools. Utah and Texas have demonstrated that armed teachers behave responsibly.
Armed defenders deter attacks on diamond stores. Children are more precious than diamonds, and deserve equal protection.
And this is not and "assault weapon:"
Don't you feel safer knowing that the Democrats want to ban the upper but not the lower gun?