The best way to get what you want out of a law is to make it vague. A vague law is a law that needs to be interpreted. Since no one is devoid of presuppositions, the person or persons interpreting the law will interpret it in terms of his or her worldview.
Look what our politicians have done with the phrase “general welfare.” Even though the Constitution is specific about what constitutes general welfare (there’s a semicolon after the phrase with a list that follows defining the meaning of the phrase), lawmakers have turned it into a wax nose to be shaped by wealth confiscation and wealth redistribution policies.
Now we come to the Dianne Feinstein bill that would allow numerous firearms. The descriptions of these guns, if interpreted by judges who are anti-Second Amendment advocates, could spell disaster for gun ownership.
Consider this from WND:
“Alan Korwin is a nationally recognized expert resource on the issue of gun laws, and runs Bloomfield Press, which is the largest publisher and distributor of gun-law books in the country.
“He said if the plan by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is made law, ‘any semiautomatic firearm which uses a magazine – handgun, rifle or shotgun – equipped with a “pistol grip,” would be banned.’”