During her appearance on Meet the Press, Sen. Klobuchar said “What these hunters were telling me the last few days is they are willing to do some background checks. They asked me why the bump stock bill hadn’t passed. They understand as law-abiding gun owners, that we need to make changes.” Later, she said “I would like to see an assault weapon ban come up for a vote. And I would also like to see the work we need to do on domestic violence.”

Honestly, I’d love to see a vote on banning assault weapons in both the House and Senate. It’d be interesting to see how many Democrats would vote against that ban. Let’s finish this debate. Banning scary-looking weapons that aren’t any more deadly than a traditional-looking semi-automatic is pandering at its worst. That isn’t making people safer. It’s telling people that they’re safer without making them safer. Shame on these panderers for selling false hope.

In the past, Sen. Klobuchar supported feel-good, do-nothing gun control measures:

Q: What about assault weapons?
A: I did favor extending the ban on assault weapons. Unfortunately, we didn’t prevail.

Voted YES on banning high-capacity magazines of over 10 bullets.
Congressional Summary:
The term ‘large capacity ammunition feeding device’ means a magazine or similar device that has an overall capacity of more than 10 rounds of ammunition
Opponent’s Argument for voting No: Sen. GRASSLEY. I oppose the amendment. In 2004, which is the last time we had the large-capacity magazine ban, a Department of Justice study found no evidence banning such magazines has led to a reduction in gun violence. The study also concluded it is not clear how often the outcomes of the gun attack depend on the ability of offenders to fire more than 10 shots without reloading. Secondly, there is no evidence banning these magazines has reduced the deaths from gun crimes. In fact, when the previous ban was in effect, a higher percentage of gun crime victims were killed or wounded than before it was adopted. Additionally, tens of millions of these magazines have been lawfully owned in this country for decades. They are in common use, not unusually dangerous, and used by law-abiding citizens in self-defense, as in the case of law enforcement.

A well-trained gunman doesn’t need a large-capacity clip to reload quickly. Further, most of the mass-shooting attackers did tons of training before carrying out their attacks. This is another feel-good provision that doesn’t fix a thing. Anything that doesn’t actually prevent lethal situations should be ignored. Period.

The key to this that the MSM and liberal politicians haven’t talked about is hardening soft targets. I won’t pretend that hardening such targets will eliminate mass shootings. Evil will still exist. I’ll guarantee, though, that we’ll see a major reduction in the number of fatalities if targets are hardened.

2 Responses to “Amy Klobuchar on gun control”

  • JerryE9 says:

    It remains an item of astonishment to me that we have a law prohibiting guns within 1000 feet of a school, so what happened in Florida is simply not possible, right?

  • Chad Q says:

    What astonishes me more is that murder has been a felony crime for longer than I’ve been alive and it hasn’t deterred anyone from committing the crime. Bad people are going to do bad things no matter how many laws you pass.

Leave a Reply