Tag Archives: Dianne Feinstein

What no one is telling us about Feinstein’s gun legislation – Part 1

Dianne_Feinstein_gun_banSen. Dianne Feinstein has been on a mission since the original Clinton gun ban failed to meet her expectations – the complete and total revocation of the second amendment rights for any and all private persons.

Right after the Sandy Hook tragedy, she was able to pull out an all-encompassing piece of gun legislation that went much further than Clinton dared while using the murder of innocents to affect her political agenda. The question everyone should be asking is – what’s in it? (and no, we shouldn’t wait until they pass it to ask – we know what happens when they do that.)

The intermediate goal of the bill is apparent in section 1: ‘This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Assault Weapons Ban of 2013’’’ – the long term goal is up to the reader to discern. The question is what do they intend next?

The way that Congress tries to bury the details is by only showing the amendments to existing U.S. code and/or bills, amendments and laws. We’ll spend the time to show you the existing codified law referenced in the Senators’ bill so you can best judge what the changes mean. Otherwise, the bill seems harmless…

First, is how the Senator and her compatriots choose to define things. Several types of firearms definitions are added to section 921(a) of the U.S. code, which is the definitions section.

Their first change is to add “semiautomatic pistol” to the list of definitions just after paragraph 29. Previously, only “handguns” were defined in this section of the U.S. code. Even though the bill is supposedly about assault rifles, this new definition is included :

(1) by inserting after paragraph (29) the following:

(30) The term ‘semiautomatic pistol’ means any re-peating pistol that

(A) utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round; and

(B) requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.

Why is the new definition of a semi-auto pistols necessary if the bill isn’t about them? In chess, one must not take a single move at its face value – the player must calculate what moves the first makes possible. Many further actions are possible once a simple definition is codified. To make something evil, first you have to define it. Then everyone knows what they should hate when you use that well-defined term – kind of like “assault rifle”.

Next, Feinstein takes care of to define semiautomatic shoguns. Is this necessary in an assault gun ban? Of course not, but that would assume the bill is totally about keeping schools safe or theaters or some other public space. The bill adds paragraph 31, just after the semi-auto handgun definition in 921(a) as:

The term ‘semiautomatic shotgun’ means any repeating shotgun that—

(A) utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round; and
(B) requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.’’

The Senator’s bill takes care to define semi-automatic shotguns like those used by duck and goose hunters, for home defense or by competitive shooters . Even some skeet shooters use “auto-loaders” – right Mr. President?

What comes next is the most confusing definition in the history of gun terminology. “Semautomatic assault weapon” is to be added to paragraph 36 of 921(a). Which is it? A Ruger Mini-14 ranch rifle is no more an assault rifle than any other detachable magazine rifle. Under certain circumstances – your semiauto will be considered a “Semiautomatic assault weapon” under paragraph 36 of U.S. Code 921(a). Those who do not understand the law are destined to get run over by it. I’ll have to break this up in several parts to clarify what each part means.

The term ‘semiautomatic assault weapon’ means any of the following, regardless of country of manufacture or caliber of ammunition accepted:

(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any 1 of the following:

(i) A pistol grip.
(ii) A forward grip.
(iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
(iv) A grenade launcher or rocket launcher.
(v) A barrel shroud.
(vi) A threaded barrel.

Sub paragraph A above is where the “single military characteristic” rule comes in. In the prior ban, two or more of these characteristics had to be present in order to meet the definition.

(B) A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device de-signed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

This next section should cause many gun owners to take pause:

(C) Any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.

Sub paragraph C is open to interpretation. Would a certain buffer spring, buffer, lighter bolt or carrier be considered one of these devices? Could this be used to take a grandfathered (we’ll get to this later) rifle and make it un-grandfathered?

(D) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any 1 of the following:

(i) A threaded barrel.

(ii) A second pistol grip.

(iii) A barrel shroud

(iv) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip

(v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.

And now we know why they had to define semiautomatic handguns. So they could then turn them into banned weapons.

(E) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(F) A semiautomatic shotgun that has any of the following:

(i) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
(ii) A pistol grip.
(iii) A fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds.
(iv) The ability to accept a detachable magazine.
(v) A forward grip.
(vi) A grenade launcher or rocket launcher.

This makes shotguns popular with 3-gun competitors illegal. It also explains why they had to define semiauto shotguns – so they could ban them. A semiauto with more than 5 shot capacity is a popular choice for home defense. These defense shotguns are almost always configured with collapsible stock, pistol grip and 7+ round capacity.

(G) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
(H) All of the following rifles, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof: (the list is expansive – we’ll put it up as a separate post here)

There are several things that should get the attention of current gun owners. “Barrel Shroud” is defined as “(A) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel of a firearm so that the shroud protects the user of the firearm from heat generated by the barrel.” That’s right, your shotgun’s forend, your rifles handgaurd or any other device that keeps you from the heat of a gun barrel is now one of the things that defines a banned gun. Don’t think they won’t refine these definitions to include even more innocuous guns. While they may not be trying to limit the guns you like today – they won’t stop at just these. Soon, the evil guns you like will be limited.

This bill goes after guns that weren’t previously thought evil: hadguns and shotguns used for personal defense and competitive shooting. The bill is not as innocuous as the mainstream media would have us believe – probably because they don’t understand it.

There are several more terms defined by the Democrat sponsors of this bill (Feinstein, Schumer, Durbin, Whitehouse, Blumenthal, Levin, Rockefeller, Mikulski, Boxer, Reed, Lautenberg, Menendez –alleged child prostitute user?), Carden, Gillibrand, Schatz, Murphy, and Warren) – it’s time to think deeper about what our public servants are pushing.

Understand that politicians are only starting with gun sales. In Colorado they believe that the ownership of a gun is, in itself a dangerous action. They seek to force gun owners, sporting goods store owners and manufacturers of sporting goods to be liable should anyone use their products to commit a crime. It is as if all gun owners seek to attack schools, theaters or whatever.

America is losing the belief in itself and its people. Government officials believe they are better people than the average citizen and should therefore decide for us how we should live – the same things that King George III believed. Either we are different than that or we are the same. If we are the same, we are negating the risk that our forefathers took to allow a freer nation, a true Republic – our America.

Ceding any right to the Federal is a weakening of the individual. Believe wholly or believe not at all. The belief in human rights is absolute – not relativistic. When you hear your government officials disparaging the absolute, they are taking a bite out of your absolutely guaranteed human rights in order to give them greater power and profit. The enemy is not the top earners – it is the elitists in government.

We’ll continue tearing apart this dangerous legislation in parts 2 and 3 where we’ll discuss: grandfathering, who can and can’t acquire banned weapons, serializing of magazines, seizure of large capacity magazines, some guns exempted by the bill and more.

Firearms specifically banned by Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s bill

There is a section of Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s bill that defines specific firearms (several that aren’t even used by ANY military) that should be banned. Here is that section:

(H) All of the following rifles, copies, dupli-
20 cates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capa-
21 bility of any such weapon thereof:
22 ‘‘(i) All AK types, including the following:
23 ‘‘(I) AK, AK47, AK47S, AK–74,
25 NHM90, NHM91, Rock River Arms LAR– 5
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 47, SA85, SA93, Vector Arms AK–47,
2 VEPR, WASR–10, and WUM.
3 ‘‘(II) IZHMASH Saiga AK.
4 ‘‘(III) MAADI AK47 and ARM.
5 ‘‘(IV) Norinco 56S, 56S2, 84S, and
6 86S.
7 ‘‘(V) Poly Technologies AK47 and
8 AKS.
9 ‘‘(ii) All AR types, including the following:
10 ‘‘(I) AR–10.
11 ‘‘(II) AR–15.
12 ‘‘(III) Armalite M15 22LR Carbine.
13 ‘‘(IV) Armalite M15–T.
14 ‘‘(V) Barrett REC7.
15 ‘‘(VI) Beretta AR–70.
16 ‘‘(VII) Bushmaster ACR.
17 ‘‘(VIII) Bushmaster Carbon 15.
18 ‘‘(IX) Bushmaster MOE series.
19 ‘‘(X) Bushmaster XM15.
20 ‘‘(XI) Colt Match Target Rifles.
21 ‘‘(XII) DoubleStar AR rifles.
22 ‘‘(XIII) DPMS Tactical Rifles.
23 ‘‘(XIV) Heckler & Koch MR556.
24 ‘‘(XV) Olympic Arms.
25 ‘‘(XVI) Remington R–15 rifles. 6
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(XVII) Rock River Arms LAR–15.
2 ‘‘(XVIII) Sig Sauer SIG516 rifles.
3 ‘‘(XIX) Smith & Wesson M&P15 Ri-
4 fles.
5 ‘‘(XX) Stag Arms AR rifles.
6 ‘‘(XXI) Sturm, Ruger & Co. SR556
7 rifles.
8 ‘‘(iii) Barrett M107A1.
9 ‘‘(iv) Barrett M82A1.
10 ‘‘(v) Beretta CX4 Storm.
11 ‘‘(vi) Calico Liberty Series.
12 ‘‘(vii) CETME Sporter.
13 ‘‘(viii) Daewoo K–1, K–2, Max 1, Max 2,
14 AR 100, and AR 110C.
15 ‘‘(ix) Fabrique Nationale/FN Herstal
16 FAL, LAR, 22 FNC, 308 Match, L1A1
17 Sporter, PS90, SCAR, and FS2000.
18 ‘‘(x) Feather Industries AT–9.
19 ‘‘(xi) Galil Model AR and Model ARM.
20 ‘‘(xii) Hi-Point Carbine.
21 ‘‘(xiii) HK–91, HK–93, HK–94, HK–
22 PSG–1, and HK USC.
23 ‘‘(xiv) Kel-Tec Sub–2000, SU–16, and
24 RFB. 7
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(xv) SIG AMT, SIG PE–57, Sig Sauer
2 SG 550, and Sig Sauer SG 551.
3 ‘‘(xvi) Springfield Armory SAR–48.
4 ‘‘(xvii) Steyr AUG.
5 ‘‘(xviii) Sturm, Ruger Mini-14 Tactical
6 Rife M–14/20CF.
7 ‘‘(xix) All Thompson rifles, including the
8 following:
9 ‘‘(I) Thompson M1SB.
10 ‘‘(II) Thompson T1100D.
11 ‘‘(III) Thompson T150D.
12 ‘‘(IV) Thompson T1B.
13 ‘‘(V) Thompson T1B100D.
14 ‘‘(VI) Thompson T1B50D.
15 ‘‘(VII) Thompson T1BSB.
16 ‘‘(VIII) Thompson T1–C.
17 ‘‘(IX) Thompson T1D.
18 ‘‘(X) Thompson T1SB.
19 ‘‘(XI) Thompson T5.
20 ‘‘(XII) Thompson T5100D.
21 ‘‘(XIII) Thompson TM1.
22 ‘‘(XIV) Thompson TM1C.
23 ‘‘(xx) UMAREX UZI Rifle.
24 ‘‘(xxi) UZI Mini Carbine, UZI Model A
25 Carbine, and UZI Model B Carbine. 8
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(xxii) Valmet M62S, M71S, and M78.
2 ‘‘(xxiii) Vector Arms UZI Type.
3 ‘‘(xxiv) Weaver Arms Nighthawk.
4 ‘‘(xxv) Wilkinson Arms Linda Carbine.
5 ‘‘(I) All of the following pistols, copies, dupli-
6 cates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capa-
7 bility of any such weapon thereof:
8 ‘‘(i) All AK–47 types, including the fol-
9 lowing:
10 ‘‘(I) Centurion 39 AK pistol.
11 ‘‘(II) Draco AK–47 pistol.
12 ‘‘(III) HCR AK–47 pistol.
13 ‘‘(IV) IO Inc. Hellpup AK–47 pistol.
14 ‘‘(V) Krinkov pistol.
15 ‘‘(VI) Mini Draco AK–47 pistol.
16 ‘‘(VII) Yugo Krebs Krink pistol.
17 ‘‘(ii) All AR–15 types, including the fol-
18 lowing:
19 ‘‘(I) American Spirit AR–15 pistol.
20 ‘‘(II) Bushmaster Carbon 15 pistol.
21 ‘‘(III) DoubleStar Corporation AR
22 pistol.
23 ‘‘(IV) DPMS AR–15 pistol.
24 ‘‘(V) Olympic Arms AR–15 pistol. 9
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(VI) Rock River Arms LAR 15 pis-
2 tol.
3 ‘‘(iii) Calico Liberty pistols.
4 ‘‘(iv) DSA SA58 PKP FAL pistol.
5 ‘‘(v) Encom MP–9 and MP–45.
6 ‘‘(vi) Heckler & Koch model SP-89 pistol.
7 ‘‘(vii) Intratec AB–10, TEC–22 Scorpion,
8 TEC–9, and TEC–DC9.
9 ‘‘(viii) Kel-Tec PLR 16 pistol.
10 ‘‘(ix) The following MAC types:
11 ‘‘(I) MAC–10.
12 ‘‘(II) MAC–11.
13 ‘‘(III) Masterpiece Arms MPA A930
14 Mini Pistol, MPA460 Pistol, MPA Tactical
15 Pistol, and MPA Mini Tactical Pistol.
16 ‘‘(IV) Military Armament Corp.
17 Ingram M–11.
18 ‘‘(V) Velocity Arms VMAC.
19 ‘‘(x) Sig Sauer P556 pistol.
20 ‘‘(xi) Sites Spectre.
21 ‘‘(xii) All Thompson types, including the
22 following:
23 ‘‘(I) Thompson TA510D.
24 ‘‘(II) Thompson TA5.
25 ‘‘(xiii) All UZI types, including Micro-UZI. 10
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(J) All of the following shotguns, copies, dupli-
2 cates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capa-
3 bility of any such weapon thereof:
4 ‘‘(i) Franchi LAW–12 and SPAS 12.
5 ‘‘(ii) All IZHMASH Saiga 12 types, in-
6 cluding the following:
7 ‘‘(I) IZHMASH Saiga 12.
8 ‘‘(II) IZHMASH Saiga 12S.
9 ‘‘(III) IZHMASH Saiga 12S EXP–
10 01.
11 ‘‘(IV) IZHMASH Saiga 12K.
12 ‘‘(V) IZHMASH Saiga 12K–030.
13 ‘‘(VI) IZHMASH Saiga 12K–040
14 Taktika.
15 ‘‘(iii) Streetsweeper.
16 ‘‘(iv) Striker 12.
17 ‘‘(K) All belt-fed semiautomatic firearms, in-
18 cluding TNW M2HB.
19 ‘‘(L) Any combination of parts from which a
20 firearm described in subparagraphs (A) through (K)
21 can be assembled.
22 ‘‘(M) The frame or receiver of a rifle or shot-
23 gun described in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (F),
24 (G), (H), (J), or (K).

What even hunters must fear from Washington

I went deer hunting with my father for the first time when I was only ten, duck hunting at 13 and pheasant by 15. The current approach to violence being taken by those in Washington may endanger my ability to do the same things with my children and you with yours.

Sure, for now, they are going after those evil “assault weapons” which are nothing of the sort. But even if they confiscate every one of those firearms, some crazed lunatic will use a bolt action gun or non-“assault weapon” and kill just as many and that will be the call to go after even those more commonly used to hunt game. If the line is not drawn here, there may never be a line from which we can defend our rights.

Many politicos have uttered the now overused line that “I hunt and I never need more than 3 bullets in my gun to shoot a deer”. That’s all fine and good, if the second amendment had anything to do with hunting. But let’s tackle that crap-tastic line just for the sake of argument.

Firearms like the AR-15 are now very commonly used to hunt. Many use the “evil” AR-15 and Mini-14/30 to hunt feral hogs that are tearing up much-needed farmland and to put down coyotes that endanger game and livestock. The truth is that in the hunting world, those guns do far more good than evil and the truth must be used to create reason in the debate.

Our second amendment rights were written down and agreed to, not because our founders had some naive idea of how firearms would evolve or that they wanted to protect our right to hunt mule deer, but because they knew that power-hungry ideologues would some day seek to slowly enslave the people.  It has happened before in so many countries, the same way, little by little until the people had no way to defend themselves.

Evil people will do horrendous things – we cannot stop them. Laws cannot stop them. Only a narcissistic populace can be led to believe that they or their government have the power to stop evil. A thinking people realize that evil exists and will use any means necessary to carry out terrible deeds. Only citizens with the means to defend themselves and others can belay such things.

The tragedy in Newton is a prime example. While an evil man happened to use a firearm to cause such pain, remember that he could as easily have killed his mother with a bat and used the car he stole to plow through the bus line at the school to have the same effect. Would we then outlaw cars? Of course not. We would look to the source of the problem, not the weapon used in the crime.

For the political elite, the answer is laws. Make this illegal or that illegal, as if the evil-doer gives any care to what is or is not legal. Adam Lanza didn’t care that he illegally murdered his mother, that stealing the guns was illegal, that possessing them was illegal, that stealing her car was illegal, that bringing the guns to a school was illegal, that murdering children and teachers was illegal or that suicide was illegal. Everything that happened was already supposedly prevented by laws on the books – but they failed as they always will.

Consider the legislation that Feinstein, Biden, Obama et al are planning to push. Make a certain firearm illegal, stronger laws against firearms on school grounds, laws against magazines – none would have stopped Adam Lanza. He broke a slew of laws to commit his horrific crime. How would one or two more matter?

The guns did not cause Adam Lanza to kill anyone. There were warning signs, actions not taken and mis-steps made along the way by everyone that knew him. The wake-up call should be that we, as a society, don’t know how to deal with people like him before they commit these atrocities. Why not?

The news is focused on his tactics and tools, not his motivation and the failures by so many to prevent his spiral into darkness. America can do better.

The easy thing is to blame the inanimate object – the weapon. Explosives, firearms, knives, clubs and vehicles would already be considered illegal if used in a crime, but they still are used to kill. Should we outlaw all those things or just begin to understand the cause and admit that sometimes evil happens.

If every gun owner does not decide that all guns are rightful and only humans are evil, then all guns will some day be labelled evil. At that point, even your field over-and-under shotgun will be considered a dark and unnecessary thing.

Feinstein releases more information on proposed gun ban bill

Sen. Dianne Feinstein has been working furiously on new gun ban legislation ever since 2004 when the previous Clinton weapons ban expired.

Dianne Feinstein assault gun weapons ban

Dianne Feinstein assault gun weapons ban

Some information has slowly surfaced about her proposed gun ban bill, and now, the Senator’s office has released a summary including some information that many gun owners should find alarming:

  • Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
    • 120 specifically-named firearms;
    • Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics; and
    • Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.
  • Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
    • Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test;
    • Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test; and
    • Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans.
  • Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
    • Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment;
    • Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes; and
    • Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons.
  • Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
    • Background check of owner and any transferee;
    • Type and serial number of the firearm;
    • Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
    • Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
    • Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration.

The last paragraph is last for a reason. The Senator knows that registering currently legal firearms could only be desired for one reason: confiscation. A large segment of the American population would never want the government learning what guns they do or don’t have. Look at the outrage in New York when a liberal newspaper released the names and addresses of all gun permit holders in some counties.

Privacy, individual rights, basic human rights – call it what you will. The government has no right to know what we do in our homes unless a crime is committed.

The ATF is not currently informed of the type and serial number of a firearm bought by citizens. The identifying characteristics of the gun are NOT read to the FBI when a background check is performed by a licensed gun dealer. The purpose of the background check is only to insure that the purchaser is legally able to own a firearm – not inform the government of the particular firearm they purchased.

The transfer of the firearm is kept by the individual federal firearms licensee (FFL). Those records are not given to the government unless necessary in an investigation. Requiring that these purchases are registered with the government is unthinkable and eerily equivalent to an invasion of privacy or search without warrant. If I have not committed a crime, there is no probable cause allowing anyone to know what firearms I may or may not have.

Pure and simple, this is unconstitutional – on so many levels.

Feinstien: Weapons only going to be used to kill people

Dianne Feinstein uses Aurora as anti-gun toolOn Fox News Sunday, California Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein chose another tragedy to again push her heavy-handed, misguided anti-gun agenda.

Referring to the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle used by Jim Holmes to murder 12 people and injure many more, she portrays the popular sporting rifle as nothing but an instrument of murder and mayhem. “I have no problem with people being licensed and buying a firearm. But these are weapons that you are only going to be using to kill people in close combat,” said Feinstein. [emphasis added]

The AR designator stands for “Armalite Rifle” not assault rifle as the anti-gun liberals would have you believe. In fact, because it’s an AR-15 and not an M-16, it is not an automatic or select-fire weapon that would be used by troops in an assault. Instead, it’s a venerable sporting rifle used in competitions such as 3-gun, NRA high-power rifle (service rifle) and hunting.

The AR is a component-system, semi-automatic rifle which does not demand that it be used in close combat nor does it entice folks to shoot innocent people in close combat. Instead, it is a great platform for hunters and sporting shooters of all ages, genders and abilities. Some fit them with light, flat-shooting rounds for varmint hunting, others with heavy rounds to help deal with the feral swine (wild pig) infestation in the Southeast, and many calibers in between for everything from wolves to deer.

The fact that banning rifles like the AR-15 will amount to no fewer tragedies was not lost on Colorado’s own Governor Hickenlooper as he said, “”I mean, if he couldn’t have gotten access to the guns, what kind of bomb would he have manufactured.” Holmes’ apartment was littered with homemade bombs intended to kill. Blame the killer, not the tool.

Semi-automatic shotguns are used by today’s waterfowl and upland bird hunters as well as sporting clays shooters. The softer recoil and fire rates make the for better outings.

Rifles and shotguns are not purchased by millions of Americans in order to kill lots of people in close combat situations, in fact, they are almost never used for such purposes. One incident does not indicate the need to strip a huge portion of the American population tools they enjoy and use for legal purposes.

There is also the constitutional issue of the government limiting the ownership of firearms by its citizenry. Allowing the government to slice away little bits of that right will ultimately end with no rights at all. Today it will be AR-15s, tomorrow semi-auto shotguns, then pistols, then revolvers, then muzzle loaders, then black powder itself.

No amount of government regulation would have prevented the Aurora tragedy. In fact, rules disallowing concealed carry in the theater may have prevented that one person that could have halted the massacre as soon as it began. Instead, a psychopath was allowed to wander the theater knowing that his victims could do nothing – theater rules said so.

Outlawing semi-automatic sporting firearms will do no more to protect Americans than outlawing red-haired Phd students from going to the movies. The government cannot protect us at every step. We have to do that ourselves.