ATF explains ‘weapon of choice’
Indeed: The demonization of ordinary firearms for the next “assault weapon” ban is picking up steam with the help of the ATF.
3 Responses to “ATF explains ‘weapon of choice’”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
December 31st, 2008 at 8:46 pm
What did Jim Needles say that was false?
December 31st, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Anonymous, so what if it is true. The guns have nothing to do with the crime. The tool is in the hands of a criminal.
I dont care if they use artillery or rockets. They are still criminals with tools.
He could have used a bb gun or knife. The idea is the crime, not the tool.
Thats what the difference is.
They and apparently YOU are trying to move the banning of guns up the ladder. ALL guns that I have are SEMI automatic or at least fire ONE shot per trigger pull. That is all they have always done until the advent of FULLY AUTOMATIC at ONE PULL of the trigger firing MANY rounds. We do not have those and they are illegal. Im guessing they have been modified by the criminals in some fashion if they are firing automatically.
But then Im guessing you are going to the ban ALL gun routes. That is going to be very dangerous if the Obama clan tries that one.
December 31st, 2008 at 11:37 pm
it’s not that what he said is untrue, but how he said it. If you read it again and substitute butcher knife then it would seem that Rachael Ray is a potential murderous drug czar. we’ll She might resent that as much as I resent being lumped in with drug lords because i shoot a gun that LOOKS like a military tool. Guns do not commit crimes. Criminals commit crimes. if you give decent people the most powerful weapons in the world it does NOT turn them into murderous maniacs. If you disarm them it does not turn criminals in to tame lambs of peace and love. It does turn decent people into lambs at the mercy of the merciless.
The second amendment to the US constitution does not address a right to hunting weapons it specifically states that “A WELL regulated militia (regulated in the sense of appointed and outfitted) being essential to the maintenance of a free state”. That means that the only check to the power of the president as commander in chief is a well armed populace that will resist the military if he should declare himself president for life. No they did not have even semi automatic weapons in that day, but the general populace was better armed and equipped than the average soldier in that day. The military ate whether they could shoot straight or not, the general populace hunted for the pot and profit so they paid extra for the militarily important advantage of rifled barrels.