Sunday, June 8, 2008

Ban Ownership

It's only "reasonable".

  • Mandatory waiting periods to purchase a gun
That have never been shown to reduce gun violence.

  • Requiring citizens to actually register their firearms
So the Gov't knows where they are when they decide to ban them (CA, NY, NJ, DC, Chicago, Etc.)

  • Mandatory micro stamping of guns to aid tracing weapons
A process that has been found to be useless in solving crimes.

  • Banning inexpensive handguns that make it easier for criminals to acquire
So only wealthy people can own firearms? They never commit crimes, do they?

  • Limit gun purchases to one gun a month
So you can end collecting.

  • Require training for gun owners
So only the Gov't can decide to make training so onerous, no-one, including police, could pass.

  • Restrict gun ownership to citizens 21 and older
So you can vote, join the military, drive, etc. , but not protect your family?

  • Eliminate right to carry concealed weapons
So restrict people who don't commit crimes?

  • Ban gun shops from operating within 5 miles of a school
Why, if they can't own guns anyway? Are "gun shops" dangerous?

  • Ban resale of police firearms which include high powered assault weapons
Why? What is a "high powered assault weapon"? Can you provide a definition?

  • Ban high capacity ammunition magazines that are often used by gang members in drive by shootings and not needed to kill a deer
You mean like in the Henry Varmint express? They're "often used by gang members"? How many rounds are actually fired?

Read the rest. The usual histrionics and outright nonsense.

Via ArmsandtheLaw.


Anonymous said...

So mandatory waaiting periods don't reduce fun better not let the anti's see that...

Thirdpower said...