I am surprised by how often I run into folks who tell me that they were fine with the "Assault Weapon" ban because "nobody needs an assault weapon"
I then explain to them that the guns defined by the now expired assault weapon ban were nothing more than normal semi-automatic guns that have 2 or more "evil looking" features (such as a pistol grip) that make them no more dangerous than any other semi automatic gun.
Some of the "evil features" included in the definition of the expired gun ban were:
Any semiautomatic rifle with a detachable magazine, and two or more of the following features:
- A folding or telescoping stock
- A pistol grip
- A flash suppressor
- A grenade launcher
- A bayonet lug
I also tell them that the gun grabbers will NEVER take their hunting rifle without first calling it a "sniper rifle." That usually gets their attention.
We should not allow the gun grabbers to take any of our guns - we need to stand together. If we don't hang together, we will hang separately.
Subscribe
9 comments:
I agree 100% Thank goodness the Clinton gun ban expired. We should never allow such drivel to become law again.
HR 1022, introduced into the House of Representatives this year makes the Clinton Assault weapons ban look good. It not only adds many more weapons to the banned list, but it gives the Attorney General to add more at his discretion.
Keep your eyes open, act swiftly, or you will lose your second amendment rights one step at a time.
Let your elected representatives know that you strongly oppose this bill.
Thanks. I'll definitely take a look at that bill. I Don't want anything like that to become law.
Get a life. Read a book or something. Guns are for killing.
Actually guns are not "for killing" they are for self defense & for "stopping" a criminal who has evil intentions against you or your family. 98% of the time in the use of a gun for self defense no shot is required. Of the 2% of cases when shots are required, the criminal will be stopped, but NOT killed more than 80% of the time.
Thank you for pointing out that it's only a matter of time before the grabbers try to take our bolt-actions under the guise of "sniper rifles".
e.g. You mean, the military uses Remington 700s? What possible use could a civilian have for a military rifle?
As for the anonymous boob with the brilliant observation that "guns are for killing". Well, yeah. And my Mini-14 (which would be banned under HR1022) has done a fabulous job of killing some vicious coyote on ranches south of here, preserving the rancher's sheep, wool, his income, and fluffy sweaters that the wool became in order to keep bleeding hearts warm.
A pithy sound bite does not an effective argument make.
Thanks floatingaxehead. Yes, Ted Kennedy's Car has Killed More People than my Gun. :)
Well, ok, but that one's true! LOL!
unrelated aside, I got turned onto your blog from Gun Rights Advocates podcast, and stumbled onto your post about ammo serialization. Wanted to thank you for the great work you do here.
Thanks floatingaxehead. I'm a regular listener of Mark's podcast too. Very enjoyable podcast.
Post a Comment