Background checks would not have prevented (names of scumbags redacted-ed.) from obtaining guns.But he wants more gun control anyway because it 'might' do something.
...none would likely have prevented any of the mass casualty shootings above.
I flogged that dead horse after (scumbag names redacted-ed.)......I thought I'd flog a different one this time.
Let's take a look at some of his genius ideas.
1. limit caliber size and powder amounts
Yeah, ok. He's heard the word 'caliber' and 'high velocity' in the same sentence before but doesn't know that .22lr and a scary 'assault weapon' caliber of .223 are only 3 thousandths of an inch different.
2. limit magazine size
Oh, another vague talking point. To what shall it be limited to? Why that particular number? Because some numbers are scarier than others.
3. restrict the amount of ammo that can be purchased
Why? Oh right, because he heard the scary number of 6,000 in relation to CO. Same for:
4. and the amount of accumulative totals of ammo one can own.
Again, this is the 'booga booga' factor most gun control advocates rely on. He'ld crap himself if he knew that the amount I own is more than the above number and pales in comparison to dedicated shooters and enthusiasts.
5. require gun owners obtain liability insurance before purchasing a weapon.
Oh yeah because that would NEVER be abused and would NEVER be a way to keep the non-wealthy and connected from obtaining firearms.
These are the magical unicorn farts that 'might' do something, but we all know they wouldn't when enacted in real life.