• Latest
  • Trending
  • All
  • News
  • Business
  • Lifestyle
House Passes Two Democratic-Backed Gun Control Bills

Commentary: Feinstein Comes Back with New 'Assault Weapons' Bill, Bans 205 Guns by Name

March 14, 2021
EXCLUSIVE: Leading House Conservative Calls Senate’s Bluff On Trump’s ‘Beautiful’ Bill

EXCLUSIVE: Leading House Conservative Calls Senate’s Bluff On Trump’s ‘Beautiful’ Bill

June 25, 2025
PRISHA MOSLEY: It’s Not Hateful To Advocate For Ethical Medicine

PRISHA MOSLEY: It’s Not Hateful To Advocate For Ethical Medicine

June 25, 2025
Why Oil Market Held Firm In Face Of Another Middle East War

Why Oil Market Held Firm In Face Of Another Middle East War

June 25, 2025
Anti-ICE California Senator Is Buddy-Buddy With Activists That Helped Spark LA Riots

Anti-ICE California Senator Is Buddy-Buddy With Activists That Helped Spark LA Riots

June 25, 2025
‘Alligator Alcatraz’ Not Alone: DeSantis Proposes Additional Immigration Detention Center

‘Alligator Alcatraz’ Not Alone: DeSantis Proposes Additional Immigration Detention Center

June 25, 2025
Trump Meets with Zelenskyy, Talks of Increased NATO Spending to Deter Russian Aggression

Trump Meets with Zelenskyy, Talks of Increased NATO Spending to Deter Russian Aggression

June 25, 2025
Trump Admin Puts Stranglehold On Mexican Banks Fueling Fentanyl Trafficking

Trump Admin Puts Stranglehold On Mexican Banks Fueling Fentanyl Trafficking

June 25, 2025
‘Keep Dr. King’s Name Out Of Your Mouth!’: Dem Rep Blows Her Top At GOP Witnesses For Quoting Iconic American

‘Keep Dr. King’s Name Out Of Your Mouth!’: Dem Rep Blows Her Top At GOP Witnesses For Quoting Iconic American

June 25, 2025
Trump Admin Twists China’s Arm On Fentanyl

Trump Admin Twists China’s Arm On Fentanyl

June 25, 2025
Trump Gets NATO To Pony Up After Detractors Said He Would Tank Alliance

Trump Gets NATO To Pony Up After Detractors Said He Would Tank Alliance

June 25, 2025
Just About Everyone Dumps Cold Water On CNN Report Alleging Minor Damage To Iran Nuke Sites

Just About Everyone Dumps Cold Water On CNN Report Alleging Minor Damage To Iran Nuke Sites

June 25, 2025
Trump Seeking Military Costumes for Parade

Trump Nominated For Nobel Peace Prize

June 25, 2025
  • Donald Trump
  • State of the Union
  • Elon Musk
  • Tariffs
  • Congress
  • Faith
  • Immigration
Wednesday, June 25, 2025
  • Login
IJR
  • Politics
  • US News
  • Commentary
  • World News
  • Faith
  • Latest Polls
No Result
View All Result
IJR
No Result
View All Result
Home Wire

Commentary: Feinstein Comes Back with New 'Assault Weapons' Bill, Bans 205 Guns by Name

by Western Journal
March 14, 2021
in Wire
240 12
4
House Passes Two Democratic-Backed Gun Control Bills

FILE PHOTO: AR-15 rifles are displayed for sale at the Guntoberfest gun show in Oaks, Pennsylvania, U.S., October 6, 2017. (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)

491
SHARES
1.4k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

“Assault weapon” is a dangerous, menacing two-word construct that sounds like something the government should step in and immediately ban. Unfortunately, it means nothing.

If you go to your local gun shop, they won’t be selling any “assault weapons.” And it’s not like they’ll be advertising them under a friendlier name — “extra-strength firearms” or what-have-you — because the category doesn’t actually exist. An “assault weapon” is essentially what liberals want to call an assault weapon, usually because it’s a rifle and it looks scary.

And, it seems, Sen. Dianne Feinstein has found an awful lot of weapons that look scary — 205, to be exact.

On Thursday, the California Democrat introduced a promised piece of legislation that would ban “military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines,” a media release from her office stated. It comes on the heels of the House of Representatives passing bills that would establish a nationwide background check program. Both of these are agenda items on President Joe Biden’s proposed suite of gun-control measures, along with stripping gun manufacturers from immunity from lawsuits over legally manufactured and sold firearms.

“It’s been 17 years since the original Assault Weapons Ban expired, and the plague of gun violence continues to grow in this country,” Feinstein’s media release stated.

“To be clear, this bill saves lives. When it was in place from 1994-2004, gun massacres declined by 37 percent compared with the decade before. After the ban expired, the number of massacres rose by 183 percent. We’re now seeing a rise in domestic terrorism, and military-style assault weapons are increasingly becoming the guns of choice for these dangerous groups.”

Pretty much none of this is true. While supporters of the original 1994 bill (authored by Feinstein, because of course) claim a reduction in deaths and massacres while it was in force, even reliably liberal PolitiFact notes “[t]he ban’s impact remains unclear,” the data can be interpreted in a number of ways and no direct causal effect between the ban and lower rates of gun violence or “massacres” can be drawn.

Nevertheless, Feinstein’s pushing forward with a bill similar to her 1994 legislation, one that specifically targets weapons by their marketing names.

As Jacob Sullum notes at Reason, the legislation only requires one “military-style” characteristic for the weapon to be banned; in 1994, you needed two to ban the gun. Feinstein’s legislation also takes an expansive view of what constitutes a “military-style” characteristic, including a “forward grip,” “pistol grip,” “threaded barrel,” “barrel shroud” and (yes) “grenade launcher.”

While widespread use of grenade launchers is generally confined to Xbox games, a barrel shroud — a covering that prevents a gun user from accidentally touching a hot barrel — is hardly a “military-style” gun characteristic.

While there are tweaks, additions and omissions from the original 1994 legislation and Feinstein’s other attempts at similar legislation — the most recent was 2019 — the biggest issue is that it’s much stricter on how many “military-style” characteristics you’re allowed. Namely, none. “High-capacity ammunition magazines” would also be capped at 10 rounds.

However, the bill would grandfather in weapons and magazines that have already been purchased, something Sullum pointed out indicated Feinstein didn’t believe her own language.

“Like the 1994 law, it does not prohibit possession of ‘assault weapons,’ meaning that millions of ‘these deadly weapons’ will remain in circulation even if compliance is perfect,” Sullum wrote.

“That grandfather clause makes no sense if Feinstein really believes what she says. Her bill ‘exempts by name more than 2,200 guns for hunting, household defense or recreational purposes’ — a completely gratuitous list that is supposed to show us how moderate and generous she is. But according to Feinstein, the guns she wants to ban are good for nothing but mass murder. The millions of Americans who own them for lawful purposes probably will disagree.”

And that presents another issue: The Supreme Court’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller, which stated firearms in “common use for lawful purposes like self-defense” could not be banned under the Second Amendment. These are some of the most commonly owned weapons in the United States. You might even have one (or several) in your gun safe.

“The legislation would still make the most commonly-sold centerfire rifles in the United States off-limits to future buyers, as well as imposing a ban on the most commonly-owned ammunition magazines in the country as well,” Cam Edwards wrote at Bearing Arms.

“That clearly contradicts what the Supreme Court has said in the past; arms that are in common use for a variety of lawful purposes are protected by the Second Amendment.”

This, of course, assumes Feinstein’s bill has any chance of passing. Unless the Democrats nuke the filibuster and getting all 50 senators in their conference on board with this, it’s dead on arrival. Of course, if they decide this is the moment they’re going to ditch the filibuster, we’re going to have bigger problems than barrel shrouds and pistol grips.

It’s telling, however, that this meaningless piece of legislation — which arbitrarily redefines what weapons we can buy based on things that look scary as opposed to conferring any practical advantage to a mass shooter or “domestic terrorist” — has appeared so quickly in the Biden administration.

If this kind of empty symbolism is how the Democrats plan to govern, expect our Second Amendment rights to be under unceasing attack for the foreseeable future.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Tags: Dianne FeinsteinGun control
Share196Tweet123
Western Journal

Western Journal

Advertisements

Top Stories June 10th
Top Stories June 7th
Top Stories June 6th
Top Stories June 3rd
Top Stories May 30th
Top Stories May 29th
Top Stories May 24th
Top Stories May 23rd
Top Stories May 21st
Top Stories May 17th

Join Over 6M Subscribers

We’re organizing an online community to elevate trusted voices on all sides so that you can be fully informed.





IJR

    Copyright © 2024 IJR

Trusted Voices On All Sides

  • About Us
  • GDPR Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Editorial Standards & Corrections Policy
  • Subscribe to IJR

Follow Us

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Politics
  • US News
  • Commentary
  • World News
  • Faith
  • Latest Polls

    Copyright © 2024 IJR

Top Stories June 10th Top Stories June 7th Top Stories June 6th Top Stories June 3rd Top Stories May 30th Top Stories May 29th Top Stories May 24th Top Stories May 23rd Top Stories May 21st Top Stories May 17th