Decades have passed and it seems as if Senator Diane Feinstein has not learned her lesson; continuing to ignore the right that grants Americans the right to bear arms. Despite overwhelming public opposition, she continues to stand firm in her goal of repealing the 2nd Amendment, refusing to believe that such a fundamental right is still so vital. They say one gains wisdom as they age yet in her case, wisdom seemed to have skipped her entirely.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein has made headlines again this week just like she has the last 50 years in office with her introduction of new legislation pushing to limit firearm access in the United States. The proposed bill seeks to outlaw 205 specific weapons considered to be military-style assault weapons and ban the transfer, production, and import of “high capacity” magazines. This development is only the latest in Feinstein’s long-standing history of advocating for tighter gun control regulations, which has yet to succeed throughout her time in politics. You know what they say about hail-Mary’s, it’ll take a miracle.
Breibart reports, Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation to ban “205 military-style assault weapons by name” and prohibit the transfer of “high capacity” magazines.
In reintroducing the assault weapons ban, Feinstein cited the January 21, 2023, Monterey Park shooting as the impetus.
ABC did a report on the kind of gun the shooter used.
She said, “We were tragically reminded this weekend of the deadly nature of assault weapons when a shooter used one to kill 11 people and injure 9 more at a Lunar New Year celebration in California.”
Feinstein’s proposed ban would not have prevented the suspected gunman from possessing the weapon.
In addition to banning the sale, manufacture, transfer and importation of 205 specific firearms, Feinstein’s bill requires that any assault weapon sold, traded, or gifted in the future must be subject to a background check. (The bill would apply to guns grandfathered in if it became law.)
There is also an addendum to her bill that “prohibits the sale of assault weapons to individuals under 21.”
Monterey Park’s alleged attacker was 72 years old, and Half Moon Bay’s alleged attacker was 67.
When it comes to the age cap for gun purchases, the oldest member of Congress remained quiet despite it being a popular topic among the Democrats. While it’s heartbreaking to experience such frequent shootings, bans on guns are not the answer. Instead, they should focus their efforts on getting more “good people with guns” involved in their communities. As for states like California that have even tighter restrictions on gun ownership, they’re in an entirely different situation and may require different approaches. The truth is until liberals figure out the best solution is to prevent ambitious criminals from obtaining them, these issues will continue to plague our nation. We live in a society that emboldens criminals not the citizens. Until that flips, we will continue to see skyrocketing gun violence.
Let’s continue this conversation, in the comments below.
"Kevin Costner Breaks Silence: 'Crushing' Divorce and Moving Forward" "Hollywood Icon Kevin Costner Opens Up…
Walgreens Boots Alliance CEO Tim Wentworth announced potential closures of a "meaningful percent" of the…
Dave Grohl, Foo Fighters frontman, halted a concert in Birmingham to address a crowd disturbance.…
The Florida Panthers have etched their names in NHL history not just for their on-ice…
By day, I'm mom. By night, I'm an artist," Chanel West Coast says in the…
Media Matters for America, a nonprofit focused on correcting "conservative misinformation," paid $105,000 in 2022…
View Comments
In this case even a Musket was an assault weapon ! There are no actual assault weapons as depicted, only weapons and usually they are all lethal, but to categorize semi-automatic weapons as "ASSAULT weapons is categorically false, as even a #2 pencil can be quite an effective weapon if used properly or even an automobile or knife, 2x4, steel pipe, brick, etc., so where is the actual argument here ? The only reason for trying to disarm or limit the ability to own and operate a defense mechanism such as a semi-automatic weapon is due to the FACT that some folks do not want to allow gun owners or law abiding citizens there CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to bear arms in order to protect themselves and their family from a TYRANICAL GOVERNMENT that wants to control and diminish such rights ! So there, argue that ! "Liberal UNCONSTITUTIONALIST" will always lose out on this one ! Our CONSTITUTION is not for sale at any cost, do not forget what we are and how we got here !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The O L D broad or her sycophants are trying to make a name for herself before she crokes!