Senator Dianne Feinstein Claims Her “Assault Weapons Ban” Worked – But Here’s What She Didn’t Tell You
On Friday, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) tweeted out numbers that she clearly didn’t come up with herself but pretty much took word for word from The Washington Post’s report on various “gun violence experts” that claim gun bans work. The problem is that her claim comes from one man, and she doesn’t present the entire picture of what takes place when you introduce mass gun bans.
Feinstein tweeted, “24 years ago today President Clinton signed our Assault Weapons Ban into law. Over the next 10 years” there were 37% fewer gun massacres and 43% fewer gun massacre deaths. But in the 10 years after the ban expired in 2004, gun massacre deaths rose by 239%.
24 years ago today President Clinton signed our Assault Weapons Ban into law. Over the next 10 years there were 37% fewer gun massacres and 43% fewer gun massacre deaths. But in the 10 years after the ban expired in 2004, gun massacre deaths rose by 239%. #EnoughIsEnough
— Senator Dianne Feinstein (@SenFeinstein) September 13, 2018
OK, first, she pulled this from the CIA-tied, Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post, which included a section on Louis Klarevas of the University of Massachusetts at Boston and his book “Rampage Nation.”
According to Klarevas, “You would see drastic reductions in what I call gun massacres” with the return of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban.
However, while he defines “gun massacres” as six or more people shot and killed, what is not mentioned in the particular firearms used to commit the crimes. After all, the majority of crimes committed with a gun do not include what Feinstein and her lemmings refer to as “assault weapons.”
Here’s the part that Feinstein pretty much lifted to tweet:
Compared with the 10-year period before the ban, the number of gun massacres during the ban period fell by 37 percent, and the number of people dying from gun massacres fell by 43 percent. But after the ban lapsed in 2004, the numbers shot up again — an astonishing 183 percent increase in massacres and a 239 percent increase in massacre deaths.
While Klarevas mentions high capacity magazines factoring in as far as a ban, he apparently produces no evidence of weapons used in the shootings being tied to that. Furthermore, if someone wants to simply bypass that issue, they can bring many weapons that fall under the prescribed legislation that seeks to restrict and regulate the keeping and bearing of arms, which is a violation of the Second Amendment.
Senator Feinstein hasn’t done any research on the matter. She merely parrots whatever she wants to parrot despite the fact that she doesn’t tell you the who story.
Following the shooting in Texas last year, Feinstein introduced another assault weapons ban bill saying, “This bill won’t stop every mass shooting, but it will begin removing these weapons of war from our streets. Yes, it will be a long process to reduce the massive supply of these assault weapons in our country, but we’ve got to start somewhere.”
No, you need to follow the Constitution! And since it won’t stop mass shootings in the least, it will do no good. Let me quote from a previous article I wrote a few years back regarding things Feinstein did not tell you occurred when her ban was lifted in 2004.
The original piece was written back in 2012, long after Feinstein’s unconstitutional legislation saw its end.
In 1992 the United States had a violent crime rate of 757.7 per 100,000. The murder and non-negligent manslaughter rate was 9.3 per 100,000. When you consider the numbers, we are talking an extremely small percentage.
Nearly 20 years later, would you think that the United States violent crime has increased or decreased, especially in light of the fact that there are hundreds of millions of guns in our country? If you said “increased,” you are wrong, dead wrong.
In 2011, the same reports shows that the violent crime rate has dropped to half of what it was in 1992. The violent crime rate reported in 2011 was 386.3 per 100,000.
How about that murder rate? Same thing. It dropped nearly fifty percent as well to 4.7 per 100,000.
According to the FBI’s CIUS report on Murder Victims by weapon, the total number of firearms used to commit murder in 2011 were 8,583.
This number is down by about 1500 from 2007 and I might add, without an “assault weapons ban.” The report also indicates the kinds of firearms used in these murders: Handguns, rifles, shotguns, other guns, firearms (not stated). Of the 8,583 murder in 2011 committed with a firearm, only 323 rifles were used. The AR-15 and other rifles, referenced as “assault weapons” by the Left, are a subset of that 323.
These are things to keep in mind when dealing with emotional, irrational, and moronic gun control freaks. Fact, the United States violent crime rate is down 50% in the past 25 years. Fact, the United States murder rate is down 50%. Fact, the United States has 3.5 less times violent crime rate than the disarmed United Kingdom. Fact, rifles deemed by gun grabbers as “assault weapons” are used in a very small minority of murders that occur annually in the United States.
So, violent crime goes down when assault weapons bans are not in place, and that by 50%, but Feinstein doesn’t tell you that. She also doesn’t tell you that she is targeting far more than an AR-15. She is basically targeting virtually every semi-automatic handgun and shotgun on the market, and even many semi-automatic rifles. Don’t be fooled.
Lest you think Feinstein respects the Second Amendment, she doesn’t and she told the people that she would have revoked their Second Amendment rights and forced the people to turn their weapons in.
But don’t take my word for it. Look at the FBI’s own numbers through 2017 and see if you think Feinstein’s claims really should be believed in light of what it actually produces: more violent crime.
Furthermore, the vast majority of gun crimes occur in the most strict gun controlled metropolitan cities in America. In metropolitan areas, where the population is greater than 250,000 the violent crime rate is double that of the national average. The murder rate is more than double the rate of the national average.
If what she says is true, there should be an effect, but that doesn’t happen, does it? And she isn’t about to tell you that.
The fact is that because people use a tool to commit a crime does not mean banning that tool will stop such crimes. It just means the criminal will find new means to commit the violent crime, and this is what Feinstein will never tell you because it exposes the lack of logic she possesses and to cite the Second Amendment exposes her lawlessness.
The incredible Bill Whittle did an amazing video just a couple of years ago demonstrating that the things I presented above in a concise presentation in which he showed that despite the fact that America leads the world in gun ownership, we aren’t even listed in the top 100 countries for murder rate… unless maybe you support what Dianne Feinstein and others support, and that is the holocaust of American babies murdered every year.
This doesn’t just apply to America. In that same report, I pointed out what took place over in England with their gun ban.
Take a look at the Home Office Statistical Bulletin, which gives the crime numbers for England and Wales for 2011/12. Keep in mind that these numbers will be the lowest in the UK as separate crime stats are kept for Northern Ireland and Scotland, which have higher numbers than the ones in this report.
England and Wales have a combined population of about 56 million.
Take a look at the number of violent crime offenses that took place in 2011. According to this report, there were 762,515 violent crime offenses. In a population of 56 million, that comes out to 1,361 per 100,000! That’s 3.5 times the rate of the United States!
England and Wales do have a smaller murder rate than the United States, which is around 1.3 per 100,000. However, what we are not told in the discussion is what instruments are used to commit the murders or the violent crimes that are listed. Clearly the disarmed UK public has a higher rate of violent crime than the mass-armed citizenry of the United States. This is important, because from those of us who advocate that people be allowed to defend themselves, a firearm is the very best means of doing that. Additionally you carry a firearm in hopes that you never have to use it.
Additionally, keep in mind that in the United States we have 186 metropolitan areas where the population is 250,000 or greater. In the UK, they have only 32.
So what is the moral here? Less guns do not mean, less violent crime.
Additionally, Feinstein will never tell you about places throughout the world that have far stricter gun control that the representatives of the US have unlawfully imposed, and the results have been beyond anything we’ve seen in America.
Take a look at Nazi Germany under Adolph Hitler. Take a look at Communist China under Mao tse Tung. Take a look at Cambodia under Pol Pot. Take a look at the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin. Take a look at Italy under Benito Mussolini.
Let Feinstein defend the disarming of the people and bring those instance up to her!
I believe the reason Feinstein wants to take our guns is because she is afraid. She’s a fearful woman, and so are other Communist-minded senators, like Connecticut’s Chris Murphy, and she demonstrated this with her ridiculous claims during the Kavanaugh hearings. However, the law is to be based upon the moral law of God, not fear.
Keep in mind that this is a woman that had a Communist Chinese spy as her driver and adviser for two decades. Do you really want to trust her with anything in government, let alone protecting your rights?
The issue is not a particular gun. It’s not about how many bullets you carry or the capacity of the magazine. It’s all about the heart. And for the criminal, they have a darkened heart that’s just as darkened as Senator Dianne Feinstein’s heart when she seeks to commit crimes against the people and the Constitution by infringing on law-abiding citizens’ rights. The only cure for such a thing lies in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which was based on the Law of God, the person and work of Christ and was the foundation of America once upon a time. In fact, that was what made America great!
Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media