"As
it wanes, the Obama administration grows bold, and even reckless, on
matters that send a thrill up the leg of its most leftward supporters.
Its new attack on so-called armor-piercing ammunition — which is, in
reality, a very broad attack on ammunition across the board — is a
dangerous and destructive example of the administration’s late-days
slide into rule-by-decree.
A little background, which is unavoidably weedy: In 1986, Congress revised the Gun Control Act, inserting prohibitions against the manufacture and import of “armor-piercing ammunition.” Armor-piercing ammunition does not mean ammunition designed to defeat body armor — that would be too simple. It means, most broadly, ammunition that could defeat the soft body armor of the sort that was cutting edge in the 1980s. But banning all such ammunition as “armor-piercing” would have meant a ban on practically all hunting rifles. One of the truly ignorant and insipid aspects of our gun-control debate is that the gun-grabbers spend so much time wringing their hands over “assault rifles,” which are relatively low-powered but kinda-scary-looking firearms generally chambered for rounds (mainly the .223) that are too small even to legally use for deer hunting, while at the same time insisting that they do not wish to bother us about hunting rifles, which generally are much, much more powerful than the AR-15s that so dominate the progressive imagination."
Very disturbing.
Let's cut the bull shit. They want the guns.
And they will use any statistic, however irrational or flawed, to justify grabbing guns.
Remember when they used to dismiss concerns that smoking bans would eventually encroach onto private property?
Yeah.
Well, we shouldn't believe a word when they say they just want 'common sense' gun control. The end game is total ban just like Obamacare's end game is single payer.
It's how they role.
Progressives that is.
A little background, which is unavoidably weedy: In 1986, Congress revised the Gun Control Act, inserting prohibitions against the manufacture and import of “armor-piercing ammunition.” Armor-piercing ammunition does not mean ammunition designed to defeat body armor — that would be too simple. It means, most broadly, ammunition that could defeat the soft body armor of the sort that was cutting edge in the 1980s. But banning all such ammunition as “armor-piercing” would have meant a ban on practically all hunting rifles. One of the truly ignorant and insipid aspects of our gun-control debate is that the gun-grabbers spend so much time wringing their hands over “assault rifles,” which are relatively low-powered but kinda-scary-looking firearms generally chambered for rounds (mainly the .223) that are too small even to legally use for deer hunting, while at the same time insisting that they do not wish to bother us about hunting rifles, which generally are much, much more powerful than the AR-15s that so dominate the progressive imagination."
Very disturbing.
Let's cut the bull shit. They want the guns.
And they will use any statistic, however irrational or flawed, to justify grabbing guns.
Remember when they used to dismiss concerns that smoking bans would eventually encroach onto private property?
Yeah.
Well, we shouldn't believe a word when they say they just want 'common sense' gun control. The end game is total ban just like Obamacare's end game is single payer.
It's how they role.
Progressives that is.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.