Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) is leading the charge to get the 1990’s assault weapons ban revised and reinstituted in response to the Newtown, CT school shootings. Via the Huffington Post.

“Who needs these military-style assault weapons? Who needs an ammunition feeding device capable of holding 100 rounds?” Feinstein wrote on her campaign website. “These weapons are not for hunting deer — they’re for hunting people.”

On Sunday Feinstein laid out details of the bill.

“It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession, not retroactively, but prospectively,” and ban the sale of clips of more than ten bullets, Feinstein said. “The purpose of this bill is to get… weapons of war off the streets.”

This is pure symbolism designed to make the public feel as if the government is doing ‘something’ and keeping them safe. Similar to the creation of the TSA which was never designed with real security in mind, only to give the appearance of security so people would keep flying. It was an economic policy, nothing more.

Banning assault weapons is the same ludicrous logic, particularly concerning limits on clip sizes. Think that limiting a clip to ten bullets will slow down a madman? Watch this video clip.

This fact is not lost on the anti-gun crowd. They realize that the path to banning all privately owned guns requires steps and this is just one of them. When future mass shootings still occur even after a new assault weapons ban is implemented, we’ll then move another step toward an outright ban on sales.


3 thoughts on “Limiting gun clip sizes to stop mass shootings is a typical misguided government solution

  1. I have given up on trying to understand the logic of the left. Anytime we see a tragic situation such as what happened in Newton, their first response is always to ban something. What troubles me is how so many conservatives seem to be falling into step with more gun control. This no doubt has to do with the children who were murdered, but a knee jerk reaction like this will accomplish nothing of value.

  2. You said it Larry. There is no logic to the left, all based on emotions.

    You’re right on the conservatives. I expect that from the run-of-the-mill republican, but if conservatives give up on principle as well?

Comments are now closed.