Can ANY Gun Control Activist Refute These Women’s Testimony Before The HJC On Sept 25?

On September 25, The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing called “Protecting America from Assault Weapons.” At this hearing, several people spoke to Committee members, explaining why banning so-called "assault weapons" is a bad idea. They also talked about the so-called, "scary looking features" between an AR-15 rifle and standard semi-automatic hunting rifles.

Dianna Muller testified at this hearing. She was a police officer, who served in the Tulsa Police Department for 22 years. She’s also a professional shooter, winning the NRA's World Shooting Championship in Glengary, West Virginia, back in 2016. Ms. Muller is also the founder of The DC Project.

The DC Project was born and educational efforts and non-partisan effort of 50 women, one from every state, meeting their legislators as gun owners and second amendment supporters. We are as diverse as any cross section of America. Many of our women, like victims of these mass public murders, have endured unspeakable violence themselves or lost loved ones.

My goal here is to educate people. We are law-abiding, responsible gun owners and please don’t legislate the 150 million people just like me into being criminals. It has happened, you’ve already done it. The legislation on bump stocks; I was a bump stock owner and I had to make a decision do I become a felon or do I comply. And like the gentleman that just got escorted out, I will not comply with the assault weapons ban.

I implore you to work with us, instead of demonizing us. Law abiding American gun owners are not the enemy.

www.youtube.com...



Also giving testimony at this hearing, was Amy Swearer, the senior legal policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation’s Ed Meese Center For Legal and Judicial Studies. She stated that semi automatic rifles are not the driving factor behind the rates of gun violence in the United States. Two thirds of all gun deaths in the US, are from suicides and as far as gun crimes are concerned, over 90% are committed with hand guns. Rifles of any kind, are used in only 3% to 4% of gun related homicides every year. An American citizen is 4 times more likely to be stabbed to death, than be shot by a rifle of any kind.

Swearer goes on to say that semi automatic rifles, such as the AR-15, are extremely ”well suited for defensive action against threats in a civilian context,” especially in situations where citizens are outnumbered and the police are nowhere to be seen.

She brings up the 1992 LA riots, where Korean store owners defended their businesses from looters. The fact that semi automatic rifles, like the AR-15, are accurate, as well as easy to shoot, are the reasons “why law abiding citizens buy millions of these firearms, when accuracy and stopping power matter, they are simply better.”

Unfortunately, too many policy makers appear completely uninformed about basic, factual realities, related to guns and gun violence.

We all want safer communities, but the characteristics distinguishing so-called assault weapons from non-assault weapons, are not factors like caliber, lethality, or rate of fire.

Proposals to ban "scary" looking features, like barrel shrouds and pistol grips, are for all intents and purposes, proposals to force law abiding citizens to own guns that are harder to handle, harder to fire accurately and more likely to cause them injuries, even when they're being used for lawful purposes.

www.youtube.com...




This is a serious subject and like many gun owners, I want to see further reduction in the number of gun related violence. However, the question is, does banning a certain type of weapon...a weapon owned by millions of citizens, benefit American citizens, or criminals? Is it justified to turn law abiding, responsible gun owners, into felons, by the passage of an "assault weapons" ban? Very few Americans will give up their AR-15 style rifles, regardless if there's a ban on them, because the majority would feel that the ban is unjust and goes against their 2nd Amendment rights. Besides, will a ban of "assault weapons" actually reduce gun violence in the United States?

Any "ban" that is approved, will open the flood gates for more bans. Besides banning "assault weapons," Democrats want to pass more laws on gun restrictions, because they believe that restricting access to guns can save lives...even though many don't have a clue of actual concrete, statistical evidence, or, for that matter, what an "assault weapon" actually is.



If you are a gun activist, who believes that gun bans and more gun laws are needed in this country, please, by all means, enlighten me as to why. All I ask is that you watch these short video clips, before giving your opinion. I'm not posting this thread with the intention of chastising anyone...I just want to know what your opinion is on this subject matter and why the testimony that Dianna Muller and Amy Swearer gave at this hearing, is wrong, or misleading.

Put all semi-auto firearms under the "National Firearms Act" and be done with the argument. Hunters and sportsmen will not be affected, and you can still keep thugs off your lawn with a rifle, shotgun or revolver, for all of your "Rambo Fantasy moments."

All transfers of ownership of registered NFA firearms must be done through the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (the "NFA registry").[2] The NFA also requires that the permanent transport of NFA firearms across state lines by the owner must be reported to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Temporary transports of some items, most notably suppressors, do not need to be reported.

en.wikipedia.org...

End the problem.

Case Close.

Period end.

Stop Run.

###

God created man.
Sam Colt made them equal.

a reply to: HanyManny


Yep, we all know from history what happens when facists start putting people on lists....


Molon Labe!

a reply to: HanyManny

Registration is the first step towards confiscation.

How about when placing all semi auto firearms under the national firearms act it is also accompanied by a constitutional amendment prohibiting confiscation of firearms by state and federal governments?

originally posted by: JAY1980
God created man.
Sam Colt made them equal.

A vote against guns is a vote against women.

a reply to: seeker1963

Like the lists of folks who got convicted at the Nuremberg trials? They kept lists, so after the allies won the war we could find the NAZIs. Right?

originally posted by: HanyManny
a reply to: seeker1963

Like the lists of folks who got convicted at the Nuremberg trials? They kept lists, so after the allies won the war we could find the NAZIs. Right?

Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither. Thomas Jefferson

"National Firearms Act."

Law.

Upheld by SCOTUS.

Do it to all semi-autos.

Non-sexist.

Anyone can use a revolver with far more safety and less training then a semi.

originally posted by: HanyManny
"National Firearms Act."

Law.

Upheld by SCOTUS.

Do it to all semi-autos.

Non-sexist.

Anyone can use a revolver with far more safety and less training then a semi.

Please do explain how one needs less training than the other ... do revolvers not fire when pointed at the wrong target

a reply to: markovian

Not to mention that a revolver is most cases have far more recoil, without practice and training recoil can make for a very inaccurate shooter.

Sorry Marko that should had been a reply to hangman

My deer rifle holds 3 round. Takes about 10 seconds to reload. My AR-15 30 round mag takes about 1 second to reload, and with the bolt back, i can start firing immediately. It isn't the gun, it is the fire rate and reloading time.

Everyone has to chill, and give a little bit.

Ban semis, which only feature that freaks folks out is the rate of fire and reloading speed.

Keep our hunting guns, and revolvers for protection.

Unless you are one of those weird "wet dreamers" who think you are going into combat with your civilian semis that operate like their full auto big brothers.

BTW, after 15 years in the US army, we never used our 16's on auto. 4 seconds to drain a 30 round mag - waste of rounds.

I left about the time of the 3 round bursts on the 16s. Still, thought it was an improvement.Keeps the neewbies from freaking, and hitting a buddy.

OP, no, the claims can't be refuted. The logic is sound.
The problem with lefties is that they think douchebags like Jimmy Kimmel and Steven Colbert have the answers to society's gun violence problem.

a reply to: HanyManny

The only thing your entirely anecdotal story has demonstrated is that you’re willing to give up your guns because of other people’s feelings.

That said, you should go ahead and do that. I’m sure you can get that AR dropped off today, in fact.

a reply to: HanyManny

I'll make it even simpler for you.

No.

originally posted by: ColeYounger
OP, no, the claims can't be refuted. The logic is sound.
The problem with lefties is that they think douchebags like Jimmy Kimmel and Steven Colbert have the answers to society's gun violence problem.

Excellent. "Don't give them the satisfaction," (per your avitar). Take the anti-gun argument away from them by putting semis under the same registration as full auto and sawed off shot guns. I can still hunt, and protect my family with my manually operated firearms. Revolvers are more accurate than a semi, and I normally don't have to fight off an advancing infantry platoon at my house. If I get in that situation, maybe I am the problem, and need to re-consider my lifestyle.

a reply to: HanyManny

You keep saying hunting and home defense.
The second amendment doesn't use those words and is clearly written to give the American citizen a defense against tyranny from a foreign government or our own government.
Pistols and shotguns don't do that.

I love the idiots that keep saying they are going to fight the military of the US with some small arms. Have any of them seen what an A-10 can do to a tank in 1/10 of a second? What is that air frame going to do to their trailer home?

Yup. The founders never had the foresight to imagine an A-!0, or even local police, who keep killing conspiracy nuts in their trailers when they finally lose it and try to fight the "gubment", and decide that Hillary is hiding in their walls, and that global warming is an actual person who is stealing money out of their wallet.

a reply to: HanyManny

Yeah, it's just as bad as the idiots that think the American military is going to shoot its own citizens.
Do you think an a10 is going to be staffing a trailer park in Iowa?

Are you pulling that trigger?

a reply to: HanyManny

I love the idiots

that talk about how something own should be banned, but they still own it.