TheTeaParty.net falsely claims in an e-mail that Sen. Dianne Feinstein's proposed assault weapons ban would exempt "all government officials" from the ban. While the bill would exempt military and law enforcement officials, it would not exempt legislators or administrative staff.
The e-mail further misrepresents the proposed bill, claiming that "she (Feinstein) wants to take your handguns, rifles and other weapons away from you." In fact, the proposal would grandfather in all of the existing weapons owned by Americans, so no weapons will be "taken away" from anyone.
Feinstein, a Democratic from California, and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, a Democrat from New York, unveiled their proposed legislation at a press conference Jan. 24. The bill, called the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013, seeks to reinstate and expand on the 1994 assault weapons ban, which was allowed to expire in 2004.
According to an e-mail blast from TheTeaParty.net, under the Feinstein-McCarthy proposal, "We are not all equal under the law."
TheTeaParty.net email, Jan. 30: It is bad enough that Democrat Senator Diane Feinstein (CA) has proposed a national attack on our gun rights. Today, it has been revealed that although she wants to take your handguns, rifles and other weapons away from you, she wants to exempt all government officials from her proposed gun ban! If you needed any more evidence that in our government officials eyes we are beneath them in stature and should bow down before them in reverence, then this is it. Their message is 'guns are bad for you, but they are good for us'. Their message is 'we are entitled to protect ourselves and our families with firearms if necessary, but you cannot'.
"The message that Senator Feinstein and all who support her bill are sending is that their lives, families, and property are valuable and worth defending; yours, however, is not."
The claim appears to originate with reporting from the Huffington Post and the Washington Times. Both vaguely referred to "government officials" being exempt from the ban, without explaining which government officials. That reporting was then worked into headlines by Fox News, the Weekly Standard and numerous conservative blogs.
TheTeaParty.net takes the claim one step further, though, asserting that the Feinstein proposal would exempt "all government officials." The law spells out a number of exemptions, but none of them include a blanket exception for "all government officials."
According to the bill, those exempted from the prohibition against having an assault weapon or large-capacity ammunition magazine would include "a qualified law enforcement officer" (whether on or off duty, and sometimes even if retired), "a campus law enforcement officer for purposes of law enforcement" (whether on or off duty), as well as those transporting nuclear material.
The bill also would exempt "the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State." Officials in Feinstein's and McCarthy's offices say that phrase refers to the military. Nearly identical language was included in the 1994 assault weapons ban, which was enacted as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. (See Title XI, Sec. 110102) 1994: Paragraph (1) shall not apply to — (A) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty); 2013: Paragraph (1) shall not apply to — (A) the importation for, manufacture for, sale to, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a sale or transfer to or possession by a qualified law enforcement officer employed by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty), or a sale or transfer to or possession by a campus law enforcement officer for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty).
We asked Shams Tarek, a spokesman for McCarthy, if the proposed law exempts government officials.
"If by government officials you mean law enforcement and military, then yes," Tarek said. "But absolutely not if you mean lawmakers or administrative staffs "¦ Just soldiers and cops."
One other point, TheTeaParty.net email claims that "she (Feinstein) wants to take your handguns, rifles and other weapons away from you." In fact, the proposal would grandfather in all of the existing weapons owned by Americans, so no weapons will be "taken away" from anyone.
The law clearly states that the prohibition against the import, sale, manufacture, transfer or possession of assault weapons "shall not apply" to "any semi-automatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of enactment of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013."
By Robert Farley for FactCheck.org
Opinion
Fact Check: Weapons ban exemptions?
-
-
Letters to the Editor: 05/18/2013
A positive revision; What a legislature.
Continued ... -
Another View: Work to bring region together
It seems state Rep. Kurt Heise, R-Plymouth, doesn’t understand the meaning of “regional cooperation.”
Continued ... -
Another View: Animal neglect of any kind unacceptable
According to the Humane Society of the United States, Americans own about 78.2 million dogs and 86.4 million cats.
Continued ... -
Fact Check: Is Pentagon court-martialing on basis of faith?
Q: Has the Pentagon recently declared that sharing one’s faith is punishable by court-martial?
Continued ... -
Editorial: Obama must set tone for IRS, Justice Dept.
The issue: IRS, Justice Department have much to answer for. Our view: Leadership begins and ends with President Obama.
Continued ... -
Letters to the Editor: 05/17/2013
Second to none; Teach more about less.
Continued ... -
Another View: Records seizure an insult to press
Distrust of government secrecy has been elevated to an exceptional level with the disclosure the Justice Department covertly examined two months of Associated Press phone records to determine who leaked details to the AP about a foiled terrorist plot.
Continued ... - Thursday, May 16, 2013
-
Another View: State roads see — and need — more attention
There’s no way to avoid it. In Michigan, spring and summer, always bring detours and orange cones, the calling cards of road construction.
Continued ... -
Letters to the Editor: 05/16/2013
Just state disdain; Contributes to problem.
Continued ... -
Another View: Taxes should be collected for online sales
If Michigan lawmakers are successful in passing measures to collect sales tax from online purchases, it could be the beginning of some major relief for small businesses around Superiorland — and for the cash-strapped state government.
Continued ... -
Phil Power: Get to 'core' of the problem
Michigan was one of 45 states which adopted “Common Core Standards” back in 2010. The standards are aimed at setting out the kinds of skills that will qualify kids to successfully meet 21st century challenges, both in post-secondary education and fulfilling careers.
Continued ... - Wednesday, May 15, 2013
-
Editorial: TBAISD hoards money as schools struggle
The issue: TBAISD’s millions. Our view: Big changes needed.
Continued ... -
Letters to the Editor: 05/15/2013
Get on the bus; Not an abortion pill.
Continued ... -
Another View: More will be eligible for addiction treatment
Obamacare, like it or not, is going to revolutionize health care in the United States simply because many more people will become eligible for coverage.
Continued ... - Tuesday, May 14, 2013
-
Editorial: Food trucks will help build reputation
The issue: Traverse City OKs food trucks. Our view: New choices will enhance city’s reputation as a foodie haven.
Continued ... -
Letters to the Editor: 05/14/2013
A perfect relationship; Must respond to needs; Beware the boogeyman.
Continued ... -
Forum: Mich. dairy farmers wait for Congress
For farmers in Michigan like me, observing how Congress dealt with farm policy in 2012 was like watching a football game: plenty of shouting, lots of movement, a cloud of dust … and then the ball ends up in about the same place where it started.
Continued ... - Monday, May 13, 2013
-
Letters to the Editor: 05/13/2013
Makes no sense; Elect those who will.
Continued ... -
Cheers: 05/13/2013
To the Northwestern Michigan Colleges Associate Degree in Nursing Program for celebrating its 50th anniversary. The first graduates of the program were recognized at a reception and dinner.
Continued ... - Sunday, May 12, 2013
-
Letters to the Editor: 05/12/2013
Educate ourselves; Listen to constituents.
Continued ... -
Editorial: TCAPS bond requests reflect voter feedback
After a $100 million bond issue took a beating at the polls in November, the Traverse City Area Public Schools board of education gave itself a homework assignment:
Continued ... -
Forum: Don't look to Germany as energy model
The average cost of electricity for a German household has risen by 66 percent since they established a feed-in-tariff (FiT) system in 2000.
Continued ... -
Jack Lessenberry: EEA raises questions
Ellen Cogen Lipton didn’t get a lot of notice during her first two terms in the Legislature.
Continued ... -
George Weeks: Second acts of wayward politicians
South Carolina’s Mark Sanford, who in 2011 left the governor’s office in disgrace amidst an extramarital affair but last week won a congressional seat in a special election, is the latest wayward politician to rebound in some manner.
Continued ... - Saturday, May 11, 2013
-
Letters to the Editor: 05/11/2013
$76K plus benefits?; Withdraw restrictions.
Continued ...
-
Letters to the Editor: 05/18/2013



