today, the House will take up the much- publicized ban on so-called assault weapons. It is important to understand that, despite the way it looks, this debate has almost nothing to do with assault weapons themselves. Military-style semiautomatics are no more powerful, no more accurate, and no more deadly than dozens of other firearms that would remain legal under this bill. Furthermore, according to the FBI they are no more likely to be used in the commission of crime than other guns. So why are these weapons being singled out by the gun control advocates? Simply because they look scary and they make great props for soundbite politicians. That's it. To me, it is totally absurd that while hundreds of law-abiding citizens are being murdered, raped, and assaulted every day by criminals who should be in jail, we are debating whether or not to ban guns simply because they have bayonet mounts. Folks this isn't crime control, its petty symbolism at its worst, and I for one, refuse to be a part of it. ____________________
Editor's note · Context
Debating the proposed ban on assault weapons in the House.
Share
More from Joseph Knollenberg
the Banking Committee chairman has finally seen the light. He has endorsed the concept of hearings on Whitewater, despite earlier condemning Republicans for trying to get the facts on the whole affair. The Chairman said: ``It is time for…
By my count it was 25 years. That is the story I think we have to look at, because that is the failure.
throughout his first year in office, President Clinton has set the ship of state adrift in some very rocky international waters. Now, after 13 months of rudderless foreign policy, President Clinton has hit upon a cease fire in Sarajevo…
yesterday's survey results on the public's faith in President Clinton's foreign policy skills were no surprise to me and my colleagues. We have known for some time that our country's once unquestioned role as leader of the free world is…





