Assault Weapons Ban Called 'Ignorant' by Gun Advocates
It's been just over two months since Adam Lanza took the lives of 26 people in Newtown, and the gun control debate is ongoing. Now a new legislative proposal is being questioned after gun experts expressed fears that the proposed law is misguided and does not offer any significant protections.
Gun advocates are questioning a bill by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. that would exempt more than 2,200 different firearms while only banning 157 guns designed for military and law enforcement. The bill would also offer exemptions for those firearms used exclusively for hunting and sporting, while limiting ammunition magazines to 10 rounds.
Some of the firearms that could be exempted can be equipped with various attachments that would render the same gun illegal, various gun owners argue. These critics claim that the new proposal is hollow and was only introduced to appease public sentiment.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
"The bill demonstrates a shocking ignorance of the product they are purporting to regulate," Lawrence Keane, senior vice president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told AP. "I have no idea how they arrived at this list. It would seem to be random, bordering on throwing darts at a dart board."
Language in Sen. Feinstein's bill defines an assault weapon as any firearm that is semi-automatic and that uses a detachable magazine.
A firearm could also be deemed as an assault weapon if certain attachments are included in the gun such as pistol and forwards grips, for increased accuracy and stability, as well as collapsible stocks and certain scopes.
Feinstein is known for introducing the first assault weapons ban that passed Congress in 1994, but that was left to expire in 2004. Still, people on both sides conceded that any new measure should tackle to problem at hand and not serve as a public relations stunt.
"There's no logic to it," Greg Danas, president of a Massachusetts-based firearms ballistic laboratory, told AP. "What kind of effect is it going to have?"
