[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 53 (Thursday, May 5, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: May 5, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
         BANNING ASSAULT WEAPONS: PETTY SYMBOLISM AT ITS WORST

  (Mr. KNOLLENBERG asked and was given permission to address the House 
for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, 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.

                          ____________________