in , ,

Feinstein’s Gun Proposals Would Not Have Prevented California Shooting

Sen. Dianne Feinstein doesn’t miss an opportunity to blame inanimate firearms every time there’s a mass shooting event in the country, and that goes double when that event unfolds in California. So it was with little surprise that we read the liberal Democrats’ statement in the wake of the tragic Thousand Oaks bar shooting. In it, she proposes a slate of gun control remedies, not a one of which would have done a thing to save the lives of those 12 people who died at the hands of a deranged gunman.

“Some will say California’s strong gun laws didn’t prevent this shooting, but without stronger federal gun regulations, there’s little California can do to keep guns coming in from other states,” Feinstein wrote. “Without stronger laws to prevent straw purchasing and close the gaping holes in our background check system, a presumptive murderer barely has to lift a finger to buy a gun.”

Here are the measures that Feinstein would like to implement as a result of the tragedy:

  • A new ban on “assault weapons.”
  • A ban on high-capacity magazines.
  • A ban on so-called bump stocks.
  • A bill to close Ye Olde gun show loophole.
  • A bill to keep terrorists from buying guns.
  • A bill to prevent domestic abusers from buying guns.
  • A bill that would allow family members to essentially suspend a loved one’s Second Amendment rights.

“What we’re lacking is intestinal fortitude from congressional Republicans and President Trump to say enough is enough,” Feinstein concluded. “As long as they stand in fear of the NRA and worry more about the power of the gun lobby than the lives of their fellow citizens, we’ll see more Thousand Oaks, more bodies lying at the foot of failed Republican leadership.”

The killer in California, of course, did not use an “assault weapon,” he used a Glock handgun. He certainly didn’t use a bump stock. High-capacity magazines are already illegal in California. There exists no such thing as a gun-show loophole. We’re quite certain that no “terrorist bill” would have prevented this former U.S. Marine from getting his hands on a firearm. Mental health avenues such as the 5150 law or a new bill that does what Feinstein is talking about in that last proposal? They already exist in California.

And yet, here we are.

The fact is that we, as a country, really don’t know what to do about these mass shootings. We would get closer to a solution, though, if our politicians were up front and honest about that fact. Instead, we bog ourselves down in these tiresome, tiresome fights about the NR-friggin-A over and over again until the next one happens. We’re not suggesting the answer is to throw our hands up and say, Welp, this is just the way it is. But we HAVE to see that playing this same political game endlessly is not doing anyone any good.

But when yelling “gun control!” after every shooting has become a permanent platform for your party, it’s awfully difficult to come to an intelligent solution.

Written by Andrew

One Comment

Leave a Reply
  1. Hi, i feel that i saw you visited my web site so i came to
    return the prefer?.I am trying to find issues to improve my web site!I guess its ok
    to make use of a few of your concepts!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Democrats’ Top Choice for 2020? “None of the Above”

Classic Trump Comeback: Michelle’s Husband Made the Whole Country Unsafe