Eric Holder, Obama the Immaculate's Attorney General, has stated openly that he believes it is time to ban assault type weapons in the US.Leftists in this country have been attacking the 2nd Amendment right of US citizens to keep and bear arms for many years. Their excuses have been varied, but it always boils down to the government knows best, and private citizens can't be trusted.
The excuse Holder is using for this latest attempt is the violence in Mexico. According to him, preventing US citizens from owning this type of weapon will keep the weapons out of the hands of Mexican drug trafficers. Huh? Mexican drug cartels are quite possibly the third best armed force in the western hemisphere (behind the US and Canada) - they already have the weapons, and access to all they want from sources outside the US.
As an excuse, this doesn't hold water. Why can't this man be honest with us? Why can't he just come out and tell us what he wants to do and why? Because, if the truth comes out, he will be shouted down so fast and hard that he'll be deaf for a week.
65 Democrat members of Congress have already sent him a letter telling him not to pursue this. From a Republican perspective, Holder pursing this would be golden - few issues energize the voters more than gun control, and gun control advocates lose elections when they run on that platform.
To be honest, I have mixed feelings about assault type weapons in public hands. By definition, these are semi-automatic clones of military rifles, such as the AK-47 and M-16. It is fun to fire these things. They are useless for hunting. Many folks buy them for self defense, though there are better weapons for that purpose. I don't own one, but would like to have an M-4, just to go out and plink with it occasionally. For the government to tell me I can't have one, well I object to that considering our founders gave me the right to own one. I don't have a problem going through a background check or waiting period prior to purchase, if the government chooses to implement those checks.
Does that sound wishy washy? I guess it is. I hate to hear that some jackass has used a AK-47 with a 30 round clip to shoot up his workplace and kill a bunch of people. I also hate to hear Democrats telling me I can't own one. What is the perfect answer, I don't know. What I do know is that a complete ban on them is un-Constitutional. What I also know is that if Dems are somehow successful in banning them, that will just be the beginning ...
2 comments:
Am not a gun owner, but of course I still have an opinion!
The background check and the waiting period I think are good ideas, nothing wrong with those, and the average person is fine with it.
But if Mr. Holder wants to ban assault weapons, then come out and say so. Period. The "story" of how we are helping to supply the cartels or any other kind of double-talk does not help. (As in exactly that, the Gov'mint says you don't need it, shouldn't have it and now they're going to make sure you CAN'T have it.)
And, for me, that's more irritating. Now I want you to have that gun.
Obama, Clinton, and Holder have been tossing around a figure stating that 90% of guns used in the violence in Mexico have been smuggled across the border fro the US. A powerful statement propping up their efforts to ban assault weapons.
The only problem is that it is a lie, and they know it.
Most of the weapons being used have been bought off the secondary market from Cuba, Venezuela, China, and other South American countries. Still more, M-16s mostly, were ordered by and supplied to the Mexican Army, and then stolen by the 150,000 Mexican Army soldiers who have deserted.
A tiny fraction of the weapons being used are being smuggled across the border. Obama and his cronies are lying to us, and they know it.
Post a Comment