‘Assault weapon’ opening salvo: Levin lies to Congress

February 2, 9:47 AMCharlotte Gun Rights ExaminerPaul Valone

Previous Next

11 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Charlotte Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

 Few of us doubt semi-automatic firearms are at the top of the Obama hit list. The White House website even says: “[Obama and Biden] support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent.”

The question isn’t “if,” it’s “when.” Gun control organizations generally soften up the battlefield prior to invasion: They have politicians make distressed noises about violence; USA Today starts lamenting gang members it calls “children killed by guns;” and CNN draws coverage from Sarah Brady’s talking points.

Understand too that politicians are inertia-driven. With exceptions, the party in control stays in control by offending as few people as possible, which means doing as little as possible. So imagine the significance of Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) troubling himself to stand before Congress, as he did last week, to lie about “assault weapons:”

...but also semi-automatic rifles like the Ruger 10/22
(Photo courtesy of Lori D. Roets)
 

“Mr. President, in the 4 years since the federal ban on assault weapons was allowed to expire, hundreds of people in this country have died and been injured by previously banned weapons. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence report, ‘Assault Weapons: Massed Produced Mayhem,’ details the deaths of 165 people and the injury of 185 people by assault weapons since the ban expired … Unlike semiautomatic hunting rifles, which are designed to be fired from the shoulder and rely on the accuracy of a precisely aimed projectile, assault weapons are designed to be fired at the hip and to maximize their ability to rapidly shoot multiple human targets …

“Despite the overwhelming support of the law enforcement community, the ongoing threat of terrorism and bipartisan support in the Senate, the assault weapons ban was not [sic] allowed to expire. Now, 4 years later, 19 previously banned military-style assault weapons, some capable of firing up to 600 rounds per minute, are once again pervading our streets and neighborhoods. This Congress we must take up and pass sensible gun safety legislation, including reinstating the assault weapons ban.” – Congressional Record, January 29, 2009.

Ignore, for a moment, the “600 rounds per minute” absurdity. Given that legislation has yet to be introduced, Levin’s lament means Handgun Control, Inc. a/k/a the “Brady Center” is pulling the good Senator’s strings. And while that may itself be unsurprising, it means HCI has begun the offensive for re-introduction of the semi-auto ban, which itself represents the first item on its multi-point agenda.

Complacency among our own?

Believe it or not, I’ve heard gun dealers (not always a long-sighted lot) say: “So what if they bring back the ban? All the gun-makers worked around it. I sold just as many semi-autos as before.”

Then we have Jim Zumbo’s “I got mine” perspective – since recanted but reflected by a large number of ostensibly pro-gun hunters and sportsmen: "As hunters, we don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them. . . . I'll go so far as to call them 'terrorist' rifles."

The short-sighted and self-serving among gun owners who support “terrorist rifle” bans, however, should see the more recent semi-auto language we are likely to fight, namely HR 1022. Introduced in the last Congress, it was too extreme to get traction. In this session, however, the political environment is more conducive to its passage.

What we are likely to see: A brief review of HR 1022

Far more expansive than the misnamed 1994 “Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Protection Act,” we will likely face legislation which would:

• Include all guns banned in 1994, whether by name or by features (e.g. pistol grips, bayonet mounts, detachable magazines, etc.);
• Ban even guns modified to comply with the requirements, as manufacturers did in 1994;
• Ban guns specifically exempted in 1994, such as the Ruger Mini-14 and Mini-30, M-1 carbine, etc.;
• Ban all semi-automatic shotguns;
• Ban all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines (think Ruger 10/22);
• Allow the Attorney General to ban any firearm deemed not “sporting” regardless of use in sporting activities;
• Ban 65 types of firearms by name (the ’94 ban covered only 19);
• Ban handguns which accept magazines of greater than 10-rounds capacity; and
• Ban importation or sale of full capacity magazines, also covering frames, receivers, and parts used to repair or refurbish firearms.

Oh, yes: Did I forget to mention that, unlike the ’94 ban, which had a ten year “sunset,” this one would be permanent?

Keep your eyes open

IN coming weeks, watch for the opposition to telegraph its intentions in newspaper media such as the USA Today; keep an eye on legislative alerts from gun rights groups; and be prepared to barrage Congress with calls and e-mails.

The opening salvo has just been launched: To stop this one, we need to fire for effect.

Copyright © F. Paul Valone All rights reserved
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, scanning, digitizing or any information storage and referral system, without written permission from the publisher. For reprint permission, contact: fpv@fpaulvalone.com