Craig: Why are we on the floor debating a law, not a proposed law? Because some years ago, we put a sun set provision in to see if it worked. Many of us said let's see if it works. That's what we're doing today. The great debate is wether we should extend it. The rational to extend it, is that it worked. That's the business of statistics. Feinstein used tracing data, I used DOJ data. What she presented is accurate, but let's put it in context. It was not intended for this debate. What is tracing data? Not all crime guns are traced. Not all gun traces are of crime weapons. For example, if you find firearms during a search, you do a trace. It is intelligence gathering tool. In 1994 there was a bubble of interest, hence a lot of traces. It tapered off, and therefore some argue AWB worked. Points out the use of these weapons are used less than 2% of crimes, same before and after AWB, according to the DOJ. If you're really talking about a basis to extend current law, and you look at this, and listen to the people saying AW are weapon of choice for criminals, that is simply not true. Feinstein said she has much LEO support. Lists some that do not. Says some LEO saw this had to do with keep citizens from owning their firearm. The choice of criminals is not packing around a rifle. Pictures have been shown about the AW. Describes function of semi-autos. Machine guns are fully automatic. Where lies the burden of proof to prove this law worked, to deny people their rights again? Less than 2% is the reason. Let's let this law expire. It didn't work, and it isn't necessary. Let's go after the criminal, that's how we protect citizens. We don't do it by denying Constitutional rights.
