Rick, over as SaysUncle presents a massive fisking, of this article.
Here's my more meager reply:
Mr. Williams,
Which "gun culture" are you talking about? The one were 75-90% of homicides are committed by and against those w/ criminal backgrounds or the one where less than 1% of legal gun owners commit any crime whatsoever? You know, the ones who have those concealed carry licenses that you attack as creating crime.
You ask us to justify why we "need" "assault weapons". First I would like you to define for me what you think an "assault weapon" is. In reality,all anti-gun propaganda aside, an "assault weapon" is nothing more than a semi-automatic rifle that has the physical characteristics of a military firearms. In other words, it looks like a military gun but shoots like any other semi-auto rifle. They shoot one round at a time, just like many other rifles used in hunting. The snarky comment of "venison pate" clearly shows you didn't know this .
There are plenty of things to do to stop criminals. The main one is to actually prosecute criminals instead of letting them out on bail for multiple violent charges. I'm sure you read about the Newark killings, correct? That's not an anomoly. The BATFE could stop going after firearm dealers for paperwork mistakes ( ie putting "N" instead of "No"), wasting millions on interior decorating, and spending time changing Wiki articles during work hours, and actually investigate alleged crimes. Governments could actually start funding police forces while the police can improve training and pursue anti-gang measures such as the one that lead to a decrease in crime in Chicago for over 3 years.
While those who want to take away "all guns" is in a minority, the majority of anti-gun activists want to take away the majority, and their measures have little effect on criminals, only those who follow the law.
-Regards,
Thirdpower
People's Soviet of Illinois
We are "leading the charge". At the same time, the Anti's are stabbing us in the back.
No comments:
Post a Comment