Whenever I hear that some liberal is trying to resurrect the assault weapons ban, I have the same response. I typically roll my eyes, sigh and think, “Are we still on this?” You see, we have had this discussion. We banned the arbitrarily-classified “assault weapons” for ten years and it did nothing to lessen crime.
However, Senator Dianne Feinstein, the senior Senator from the gun-hating state of California, has decided to pick up where we left off 8 years ago and attempt to reinstate an assault weapons ban. Good grief.
Feinstein succeeded San Francisco Mayor George Moscone after he was assassinated. She has cited the assassination of Moscone and Harvey Milk as a factor in her zeal to see the assault weapons ban reinstated. However, like most gun control arguments, it is not rooted in logic. The gun Dan White used to assassinate Moscone and Milk was a six-shot revolver, a gun that would not be banned under any assault weapons ban. Furthermore, I sincerely doubt that had there been some prohibition on six-shot revolvers, Dan White would have gotten up that morning and said, “Well, I would kill these public officials. If only my revolver was legal.”
Discussing the ban on so-called assault weapons, Feinstein has claimed,
“I have no problem with people being licensed to buy a firearm, but these are weapons that are only going to be used to kill a lot of people in close combat.”
I always find it telling of someone’s political bent when they discuss constitutionally guaranteed rights and say, “I have no problem with…” It’s almost as if these rights are subject to their approval; they’re not. If Senator Feinstein agrees that the Second Amendment is a good idea, then great. If not, that’s fine, too. Our right to bear arms exist, and the only legitimate means of changing that fact is the proposition and ratification of an Amendment to our Constitution.
Furthermore, I will never understand the desire by gun control advocates to restrict the most effective firearms. Calling them “deadly” and “dangerous,” liberals are always hollering about getting these firearms out of the hands of civilians. However, who in the hell wants a firearm that isn’t deadly; that’s the point. It’s like saying, “We just want to ban really cold ice.”
I’m sure this isn’t the last half-brained end-run around the Second Amendment we will have to suffer through. Thankfully, however, we have the benefit of hindsight and the ability to see that the first assault weapons ban didn’t do anything but curtail constitutional liberties. But, some legislators are like Wile E. Coyote; they just keep trying to force bad ideas.