Is Senator Dianne Feinstein so blind with her own decades old agenda that she cannot find anything more important to work on than pushing her ridiculous so-called "assault weapons" ban? Is she not aware that our country is $16T in debt and spending a trillion more each year than it takes in? Does she not know that millions of people are unemployed? Does she not see pork, fat, waste, fraud and abuse in our entitlements and other programs? Has she heard of Benghazi where the how and why Americans died on US territory apparently 'doesn't matter'? We've paid her a generous salary for ~20 years and she's choosing to focus on devices used in an estimated less than 2% of gun crime.
We've heard many times from gun control advocates since Sandy Hook that "no one needs an assault weapon". Now it's "Assault weapons are “personal pleasure[s]” that should not take precedence over the good of the nation." How many things are wrong with this attitude? Where does this so-called logic stop? Do we need Feinstein or our government telling us which "personal pleasures" we can have and which we can't? Applying her reasoning, will she be reintroducing prohibition? How many lives have been lost where alcohol, a personal pleasure, have been involved? Shall we be forced to be a tobacco free nation? Isn't tobacco a deadly personal pleasure? How many die from lung and other cancers from tobacco use? Is second-hand smoke a problem? Do cigarettes become "assault weapons of mass murder" because the smoke is "sprayed" at others? Cigarettes used to be issued with meals in World War II. Are cigarettes in use today therefore "weapons of war"? What really is next? Perhaps we'll be limited to how much soda, a personal pleasure that no one needs, we'll be allowed to consume. Oh, wait... isn't that being done already by another outspoken (gun) control advocate? Sorry, citizens of New York City.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/26/sen-dianne-feinstein-assault-guns-nnecessary-p/
Should we apologize for the "inconvenient truth" that the murder rate in our country has been on a downward trend for 2 decades even though so-called "assault weapons" in circulation has dramatically increased? (Note that the chart shows only AR-15s. Add other so-called assault weapons to those numbers.)
http://www.gunbanfacts.com/get_the_facts/history/more_guns_less_crime.aspx#UrbanInstituteIbid
http://www.policymic.com/articles/23290/7-reasons-why-an-assault-weapons-ban-will-fail-to-reduce-violent-crime
===
Related blogs:
Firearms Blog Collections
California Firearms Blogs
No comments:
Post a Comment