.
Feedback

Rep. Eric Swalwell Applauds Introduction of Assault Weapons Ban

Swalwell wants to ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices. What do you think?

Congressman Eric Swalwell announced in a press release Wednesday his support of the Assault Weapons Ban, which if passed would ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices.

Swalwell, who represents the Tri-Valley down to Fremont, said he was one of the original cosponsors of the bill and has encourage fellow new new members of Congress to lend their support as well.

Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), a leader on gun control in the House, praised Swalwell for his work to rally support for the ban

“The fight to reduce gun violence is not an easy one and it’s so helpful to have a partner like Congressman Swalwell in the movement – he’s hit the ground running and I’m grateful that he’s taking such active initiative in helping to organize our colleagues and pass sensible legislation,” McCarthy said.

Here is Swawell full statement on cosponsoring the Assault Weapons Ban:

As a prosecutor I saw first-hand the damage that can be done with military-style weapons in the hands of killers.  The tragic mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School was a horrific example for the entire country of the carnage that assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices can inflict.  Banning these assault weapons and large-capacity feeding devices is not the only solution.  But, it's a start and will pioneer more comprehensive legislation totackle the alarming rate of gun violence in America.  California already has an assault weapons and high-capacity feeding device ban, and so this bill is only asking the rest of the country to do what California has already done.  We owe it to the young victims of Sandy Hook and all those who have suffered as a result of these weapons of mass murder to act now, with this first important step, to make our communities safer.

I’m heartened that many people, on all sides of the political spectrum, are saying that now is the time to ban dangerous assault weapons and large-capacity feeding devices from our streets. Legislation to do just that has been introduced today in the House, and I want to applaud the hard work of its sponsors, Senator Diane Feinstein of California and Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy of New York.

I’m proud to cosponsor this gun safety legislation and am grateful for the trust Congresswoman McCarthy placed in me by asking me to encourage other new Members of the House to cosponsor it aswell.  I’ve been working diligently to build support for it and I’ll continue to do so throughout this Congress until the bill is passed.

Do you support Swalwell's position on assault weapons? Tell us why or why not in the comments section.

Jeannie January 31, 2013 at 05:04 pm
The kids in China were HURT, not KILLED. I rest my case.
Tim January 31, 2013 at 05:08 pm
"Nearly the same day as sandy hook, a man killed 20+ kids with a knife at an elementary school in china "
I thought they were wounded, not killed? There's no question that people crazies and criminals are the problem, but guns are a tool that assists them in causing more damage. We already heavily regulate guns. Enforce existing laws, and fix the mental health system in this county and keep guns out of the hands of prohibited persons.
Sean January 31, 2013 at 05:48 pm
Wasn't it Reagan that banned machine guns in 1988, Tim?
Chris January 31, 2013 at 07:12 pm
Nice try Jerrod.
1) Mexico gets the majority of it's illegal guns from the good old USA, so sure a ban doesn't work when US citizens buy guns in mass quantities and send them to Mexico. Did you forget about the Fast and Furious Fiasco? Our agents just watched as weapons they had tracked from a sale in a gun shop just dissapeared into Mexico because assistant DA Emory Hurley said there wasn't probably cause for arrests. 2) In DC the murder rate held steady for 10 years after the gun ban and then peaked in 1993 and has been falling ever since to levels well below those in the 70s. 3) A man stabbed 23 elementary school children in Hong Kong and NOONE died. I was able to find 10 seperate elementary school attacks in China with various sharp/blunt objects since March 2010 which resulted in 25 total deaths and 115 injuries. Clearly this is a mental health issue, but it also show that the weapons used play into how many victims survive. I understand that my guns are designed to kill, plain and simple. The idea that an individual can possess weapons that can kill mass amounts of people in a very short amount of time scares people. Gun owners say they need access to such weapons because they are scared of criminals that have them.
George S January 31, 2013 at 07:24 pm
He is a one term traitor.
Gary Allsebrook January 31, 2013 at 08:21 pm
I just quickly reviewed the FBI and DOJ crime statistics and murder by firearm has been steadily declining, in spite of what the extremely left news media would have you believe. It seems that fear sells more newspaper and more viewership on TV than reporting anything positive about the millions of law biding gun owners and especially crimes denied by lawfully armed citizens. What crime rate has been increasing is robbery and assault against strangers -so the streets are more dangerous. All of these statistics are a slippery slope anyway, especially in the UK where even the BBC is scrutinizing the "Home Office" and constabulary reporting techniques. Besides Britain has always had a much lower homicide rate (even before the firearms ban) and the number bandied about, 51, for the last report, were not correct and underreported. Interesting, knife crime is way up. You wont read that on CNN or MSNBC.
Larry Dickman February 1, 2013 at 04:33 am
Anything you say or write to your congressman can and will be used against you in a court of law...........sorry.
Nick February 1, 2013 at 03:24 pm
@David
Egypt's army defected. It wasn't the citizens vs. the military, it was the citizens plus the military vs. Mubarak and his loyalists. Had the army not defected, the revolution would have been crushed.
Nick February 1, 2013 at 03:25 pm
You didn't answer my question.
kevin torres February 1, 2013 at 03:30 pm
Here we go again another politician that just doesn't get it! If the powers to be are so concerned with our safety why don't they just hire more Police and soldiers. The rants and raves about assualt weapons have all been heard before. In 1986 when Sen Diane made it her mission! What happen with crime after 1986? Did anything really change? If the people in the bay and California could get concealed carry permits more easily maybe a violent offender would think twice about opening fire on the public! Other Country's in the world can say that gun crimes are down but, it is all hogwash. The population, the way a crime is reported or not. The fact of the matter is we have 350,000,000 Americans and every month another 10-15000 immigrants are allowed to come in legally from all over the world bringing their beliefs and hangups with them. Americans need to wake up and start taking responsibilty for the future! Getting rid of a few assualt weapons and mags will never decrease gun crimes at all...If it does email me and tell me I was wrong!
kevin torres February 1, 2013 at 03:42 pm
1)Mexico's problems are it's own .I could careless about it..Mexico has a border, if the Mexicans searched cars,trucks, and cargo coming in then they would get the money and guns, it's all about the coruption of the Mexican system...
2)Washington D.C. has a problem with violence because of the law. All of the rest of the U.S. has city police,sheriff,state,fed officers. Washington D.C. only has a police force..So, for anyone to use D.C. as a idicator for violence is comparing apples to oranges.. 3) I really don't care about China. China is an enemy of America and has shown it since the early 1940"ss..
Roger V. Tranfaglia February 1, 2013 at 04:10 pm
Apparently I'M JUST NOT getting it!!!
An average of 2 million people a year protect themselves from the criminal element with their own FIREARM! MORE people are killed ,each year,from hammers and OTHER BLUNT OBJECTS,than from FIREARMS! MORE people are killed each year from CARS than FIREARMS!! PLEASE EXPLAIN!!!!!!!!!!~
George S February 1, 2013 at 04:15 pm
Gun control to me simply means being able to hit what or who I am aiming at. My very short barreled shotgun will be a great tool in case someone breaks into my house.
Jerrod Martinez February 1, 2013 at 04:25 pm
As far as I know the only actual assault weapon still around is a SMAW, the military's shoulder launched multi-purpose assault weapon...
Davis February 1, 2013 at 04:35 pm
I am with you George, ONE SHOT, ONE KILL!,
SEMPER FIDELUS
Davis February 1, 2013 at 04:38 pm
Excuse me, It is spelled FIDELIS, 10 laps up and down the grinder with full buckets of water for me.
Lamont Cranston February 1, 2013 at 05:10 pm
Since Dr. King was assassinated 1,200,000 Americans have died in gun violence in this country. That is almost exactly the same number as we have lost in wars during out entire history as a nation. I own guns.
But it is enough. Right now the NRA supports laws under which an Al Qaeda terrorist who did not have a criminal record could go to a gun show and by an AR15 with cash. All Legal. Enough already. The 2nd amendment guarantees the right to bear arms. It does not say AR-15, or M-1 Tank. Every single right in the Constitution is subject to reasonable regulation. When the police ask for gun control, I, a progressive, feel like it is not a fascist or communist policy, but one that is from common sense. The police are not agents of a Nazi regime. They are our neighbors. They are the people who have to deal with the current policies and they want gun laws changed. We outlawed fully automatic machine guns in the 30's and it worked. Ban clips over 10 rounds and if people are caught with them fine the heck out of them. Ban armor piercing bullets and AR15s and AK47s. We have killed enough of our own people. Will this solve the problem completely? No, but it's better than now.
libertus_rebelium February 1, 2013 at 05:21 pm
Here lies the problem with the anti-gun rhetoric.
a) Just because all those people died by guns does not mean they would be alive without the existence of guns. It is a ridiculous notion that fails to even attempt a stance in logic. guns are not rampaging dinosaurs that kill indescriminately, they are aimed and activated by people. Show some evidence that these people would not kill with knives or cars and I will buy your argument. b)Fully automatic weapons are not outlawed, plenty of people buy, own and even build them. They require a special tax stamp and must be approved by the ATF. That's it. You never hear about them because nobody is stealing and using them and the media is not scared enough of them to twist the facts into getting you to hate them. c).Sweden has more lax gun laws and they have a fraction of our gun crime. If guns are the problem, please explain this. d) We are the safest nation per capita that we have been since the 70s from violent crime and murder YET there are more guns in circulation than ever before, please explain that. If you would like links to check these facts for yourself, just ask. I'd wager most people who are already brainwashed into your line of thinking won't even bother reading the facts because they don't care and are emotionally committed and would rather not have to be wrong.
libertus_rebelium February 1, 2013 at 05:22 pm
I'm for gun control and tightening up loopholes but banning weapons is not the way to stop this problem, taking freedom from a responsible person out of fear of the irresponsible is NEVER the path to justice.
Jerrod Martinez February 1, 2013 at 05:39 pm
http://m.factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/
Chris February 1, 2013 at 06:25 pm
Very intersting article. I find the end very interesting:
But among advanced countries, the U.S. homicide rate stands out. “We seem to be an average country in terms of violence and aggression,” says Harvard’s Hemenway. “What we have is huge homicide rates compared to anybody else.” Says Wintemute: “The difference is that in this country violence involves firearms and firearms change the outcome.”
libertus_rebelium February 1, 2013 at 06:55 pm
Great article, thanks for posting!
Gary Allsebrook February 1, 2013 at 07:28 pm
Contrary to Lamonts insane number of gun deaths since MLK's death, the actual number, according to CDC, mortality stats is about 480,000. I only included homicides. The current average per year currently is about 12,000. There are more traffic fatalities. You have to seek out the stats on the CDC website as cancer (at 500,000+/year) and other medical causes, heart attack, etc. dwarf the homicide by firearm death rate. Rather than add more BS to this discussion how about cite sources of information.
Jerrod Martinez February 1, 2013 at 07:41 pm
@gary Allsebrook your correct except the numbers are even lower in 2008 the cdcs numbers have flaws, death certificates are sometimes submitted as an intentional when it was unintentional. The FBIs list in 2011 say it's less than 9000 nationwide... Which means you have more than double your chances of killing yourself by suicide than being intentionally murdered with a firearm... In 2008 there were 37,450 fatal car crashes. Reprioritize and stop acting on fear government. Don't even look at numbers on tabacco deaths or cancer...
Tim February 1, 2013 at 11:56 pm
Sean you are typical liberal fool. Let me educate you. No, Reagan did not "ban" machine guns. If by machine guns, you mean fully automatic weapons (multiple rounds per trigger pull). Fully automatic weapons technically are not banned even today, however they are heavily regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934 and Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.
Gary Allsebrook February 2, 2013 at 03:44 am
It was too time consuming to look up the stats for every year so I did an estimate on the worst case scenario. No doubt the number is way less. I mentioned the cancer and auto deaths as a contrast. The CDC homicide mortality report also suggested that the largest homicide population group were 18+ followed by 20-44.
Jeannie April 22, 2013 at 03:04 pm
Thank-you, Kathy!!
Jeannie April 22, 2013 at 03:17 pm
Nobody's talking about 'banning weapons.' But nobody in our neighborhoods where we raise our kids and hope our seniors enjoy a long, healthy retirement needs military, war-grade weaponry that out flanks our law enforcement professionals. And as far as registrations and background checks, you have to sign a log book to buy cough medicine and have any kind of computer access for heaven's sake. Get real!!
Jeannie April 22, 2013 at 03:30 pm
Dear Mr. Swalwell--please have courage to continue trying to reach some reasonable compromises on this issue. I'm all in support of reasonable 2nd amendment rights as provided for in the Constitution to individuals. Law enforcement and organized military engaging a threat on our behalf is a different category. I and all citizens also have the right to 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' in the same document and NOT to be mowed down randomly by some irresponsible nutjob.
Tim April 22, 2013 at 04:49 pm
The "assault weapons" ban legislation has been shot down (pun intended) in Congress. Harry Reid removed it from the bill. It was subsequently voted on as an amendment to the bill. In the end, the bill for "comprehensive" background checks as well as all other anti-gun amendments were flat our REJECTED by the US Senate. It was a bipartisan vote with five Democrats, including the majority leader (albeit for procedural reasons) voting NO.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Ramon Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something