Every once in a while they admit what they really want:
Nowhere is the defeatist liberal approach to American politics more evident than in the post-Newtown campaign for gun control. Liberals are rushing to repeat, like a devout incantation, hand on one’s heart, that “we believe in the Second Amendment” — in an “individual’s right to own a gun.” Half of the legal and moral battle is lost right there and then.
the right to own guns is a communitarian right, not an individualized one.
A true liberal position, the place to start, is to call for domestic disarmament. That is the banning of the sale of all guns to private parties coupled with a buyback of those on the street (Mexico just moved to so control guns). Collectors can keep their guns as long as they remove the firing pin or fill the barrel with cement. Gun sports can be allowed — in closed shooting ranges. And hunters can be allowed to have long guns (if they pass background checks) with no scopes, which are not sporting. But, these exceptions aside, liberals should call for a gun-free nation
That individual/collective argument was settled before it was proposed and the Heller decision just confirmed it. This guy, a “true liberal” in his not so humble opinion, has no regard for the constitution or court rulings.
A true liberal is one who wants everyone disarmed? Got it. That can and will be used at their trials.
I love how non-shooting liberals just pull definitions out of their asses. So, how is it that a scope for hunting is non-sporting? Clean kills are the obvious results of optical sighting aids – does this buffoon want more gut shot deer wandering around? Probably – it fits in with the need for dead children, both of which further the disarmament agenda.
Simo Hayha didn’t use a scope.
King George…may profit from this example.
He was also in a target-rich environment, and shooting at people (relatively large vertical kill-zone) so range estimation was less important. And, my guess is, he had better than average eyesight.
He was also operating at close range, and it is reported that he used a sub machine gun for many of his kills.
I think using Simo Hayha or Alvin York (also no glass) or Carlos Hathcock, et alia, as exemplars is kinda unfair to us mere mortals.
Of course liberals want us all disarmed.
“We do not allow the people to think, why should we allow them guns?”
– Joseph Stalin
I sure hope this isn’t another PIDOMA* quote like the idea that scopes allow fewer misses when shooting.
*Pulled It Directly Out (of) My Ass. It’s where Leftists get all their statistics, notably one about how Superbowl Sunday was the occasion for an inordiate number of wife beatings.
If scopes don’t provide for more accuracy/fewer misses, then why was it that I invested a few thousand on NightForce optics?
[communist] As for consideration of the law or the Constitution, why should they? It/s an old document, written 200 years ago when there was no electricity or any of the things we look on as new and modern which are so grossly misused in western society and which come the revolution the proles will have no need for, by a bunch of old white guys who did not think as modernly as we do, and did I say it was an old document? How could they have known of the situation right now? If they had I’m sure they would have decided differently. I mean, come on, black people as 3/5 of a person? (Ignore the sleight of hand there from slaves to all blacks) They should have counted as 5/5 which is what the slave states wanted anyway. [/communist]
Necessity. It is the creed of tyrants, and the plea of slaves.
The gun is a tool and symbol of independence. Therefore it has to go.
Pingback: Weekend News Dump | Shall Not Be Questioned