- Apr 5, 2010
- 80,149
- 32,266
- 2,300
No, but your plan is to keep semi-autos out of the hands of of anyone, regardless of the fact that THEY are not crazy.
Those are not "weapons of war"... Don't give into the lefts attempt to control the language as well as everything else.
Yeah. You negged me for writing "assault weapons" as if the very notion of a weapon with a semi-automatic firing system and fitted with a high capacity magazine is something other than an "assault weapon".
How can there be any discussion, any progress if simply calling a spade a spade causes some to go apoplectic?
Here's what an "assault weapon" is: any firearm equipped with a semi-automatic firing system and a high capacity ammunition magazine. Firearms such as, but not exclusively, shotguns with pump actions, bolt action rifles, revolvers and single action pistols are perfectly acceptable to be held by the general public. Assault weapons, which meet the criteria I set out above are arms best held by well regulated militias and not on the streets.
Hunting, target shooting, personal defense are all legitimate uses for fire arms. Assault weapons are not legitimately used for any of those activities. At least their design was not driven by those activities. In fact, the design of assault weapons is to kill as many people as quickly as possible. Should implements with that as the primary design be held by the general public? Are those weapons designed for combat operations? For law enforcement?
Luckily you dont define what law abiding citizens can own. Considering criminals wont follow the law anyway, all you are doing is disarming law abiding citizens.
Also, if we ever go through with a ban like this, then all non military government employees must be limited in the same way. If its good enough for us, its good enough for them.
So cops can have heavier weapons locked in an arsenal and issued when needed, but when off duty they have to use exactly what the rest of the population is limited to.