DiFi's quixotic quest to ban 'assault' weapons is getting some heat from gun control supporters

[Pullo]

But renewing Ms. Feinstein’s efforts to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 left many of her allies wondering whether she had misdirected her considerable energy and passion on the issue. Almost immediately after the murders in Newtown, gun control advocates and the Democratic leadership in the Senate decided that legislation strengthening background checks for gun purchases was their best avenue for success. (Though in a sign of how they miscalculated over all, that measure was also defeated on Wednesday, falling five votes short.)

An assault weapons ban was never going to attract senators like Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, and Patrick J. Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania, with A ratings from the National Rifle Association, whose support would be needed for a compromise. And Democrats now privately complain that Ms. Feinstein’s bill seemed to rally gun control opponents, who could point to it as Exhibit A in what they perceived as a federal conspiracy to take guns away from law-abiding citizens.

But she proceeded undeterred, even after Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, told her late last month that the weapons ban would not be included in the main gun control package because it lacked sufficient votes.

Link

Without all the loud rhetoric to start banning certain firearms and accessories following Newtown, an improved and more comprehensive background check bill could have passed fairly easily.

[aquart]

1. Bullshit. Craptastic rationalization.

Disingenuous naivete on steroids.

[Kolesar]

2. You can't prove your *editorial* comment ... eom

[friendly_iconoclast]

5. No editorial comment can be proved- including yours and mine...

[shedevil69taz]

3. I would agree

but I also think that the bill would have gotten more support overall if it had stronger language against creating a registry in conjunction with expanded BG checks

[Eleanors38]

4. The language was pasted in at the last moment,

Which indicates this wasn't thought through. Even the ACLU criticized the expanded checks bill for a provision that would have stored data of individuals who purchased a gun independently, unlike a purchaser who dealt with a FFL where data is erased after a short time. I understand this was cleared up, but at the last minute. Why was the longer period in the bill in the first place? Who put it in? A reasonable observer might conclude that the government wanted to compile data which could end with de facto registration.

Feinstein did much of the work to poison the debate with her ban proposal, more even than the NRA.

[Drummerboy2277]

6. Maybe Diane wanted the bill to fail....

Pardon whilst I play devils advocate here but... Lets see ole Diane is what now 79-80. Maybe she's so tired of the whole senate thing she just wants to retire as being the bringer of the good show per say, maybe she just loaded the bill with a reach all approach she knew would fail and put on a whining its about the people face so when she retires she'll be hailed as giving it the best shot till the very end of her career... Or maybe she secretly introduced this AWB bill at the bequest of the NRA because they knew as well that the AWB would sink this bill all the way...... I could be wrong, it's a thought that hasn't been put out there... But who knows what really is the inner workings of the NRA. Some scary shit there......and one more thing while I'm on it.... Her choices in her dresses are awful... Lady look the whole frock with the cravat went out with my great aunt in the 70's, you look like you just popped out of a rerun of Maude....

[Eleanors38]

7. It was a peculiar tactic by Difi as it set the tone for debate not around

Background checks, but around the soso AWB of 20 yrs ago. Whether intentional or not, her move sandbagged b.g. Checks before it stepped on stage.