Democrats’ Semi-Automatic Gun Ban Is Clueless:
In the New York Times this month, Thomas Friedman called for “bans on the manufacture and sale of all semi-automatic and other military-style guns.” The city council of Lexington, Mass., is seeking to “ban the ownership of semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons able to hold ammunition clips containing more than ten rounds.”Go, read The Whole Thing.
Well over half of the guns sold in the U.S. are semi-automatic. And, if a gun can accept a magazine, that magazine can be of pretty much any size. So the “ten round” rule is meaningless. So, with the exception of a few specialty guns, these rules would in effect ban all semi-automatic guns. This Democrat goal is nothing new, of course — in 1998, Illinois state senator Barack Obama supported a “ban on the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons” — but for years, gun-control advocates wanted to ban guns based on appearances. Now, instead of arbitrarily going after guns because of how they look, Democrats are at least being logically consistent and talking about banning guns based on how they function.
Oh, and just in case you think that Revolvers are "less dreadful" than semi-automatic pistols, in terms of rounds fired downrange per second:
Introducing Jerry Miculek
2 comments:
Democrats have good reason to believe that the republican party is stupid, because it is. There is reason to believe that the supreme court may be rethinking it's pro second amendment decisions made a few years ago, and some lower courts are already ignoring those decisions. In the end the democrats are probably right, and demographics are against the second amendment.
I'm not LISTENING! (LA LA LA LA LA LA ...)
Post a Comment