Quote of the day—2Bill

Ban all semiautomatic weapons and create a national registry of all gun owners. No need to change the second amendment, even though that would be great. We could reduce the number of guns on the street and at the very least force any would be shooter to reload more often.

Let’s start by banning all guns except revolvers, bolt action rifles and breach action shotguns. Then let’s register every gun and require liability insurance for every owner.

This proposal would pass any second amendment challenge and would even satisfy the scrutiny of the Heller decision.

June 27, 2014
Comment to 9 signs America’s gun obsession is getting worse
[They either have not read the Heller decision or have a terrible problem with reading comprehension. The proposals would not pass the “common use” test. And even if it were to pass the confiscation efforts would be “problematic”.

Then there is the problem of registration. It’s unknown whether that would pass Constitutional challenges. You can’t be made to register in order to exercise your First Amendment rights and it seems unlikely you can be made to register in order to exercise your Second Amendment rights. The “chilling effect” would be very “pronounced”. Especially after the government just confiscated all the semi-autos.

And the difficulties in registration would be horrific. Getting “registered” for ObamaCare was and is a big mess. Getting people to register themselves and their guns when they don’t want to be registered and want the system to fail would be far more “interesting.” Canada couldn’t make it work and there would be a lot more resistance in this country.

It’s very clear 2Bill has crap for brains.—Joe]


14 thoughts on “Quote of the day—2Bill

  1. “Breach action shotguns”?
    Curious that he things revolvers would be ok but semi-auto pistols are not ok, even though revolvers are often semi-auto, they have comparable capacity and fire comparable rounds. Not to mention that the micro-printing delusion doesn’t apply to revolvers (which don’t eject their empties).

    • Revolvers are often semi-auto? Other than the Webley-Fosbury (which was ALWAYS considered a “freak action” and was always very rare), what semiauto revolvers are you aware of?

      Admittedly, a good DA revolver has roughly equivalent rate of fire for the ready ammunition, roughly equivalent cartridge power, and with reloaders, can maintain a continuous rate of fire roughly equvalent to most European military semiautos, at least until the double stack magazine became nearly universal.

  2. “_create_ a national registry of all gun owners”

    Perhaps he’ll want us all to sew little yellow bullet cutouts to our lapels?

    • Of course not. That would be considered a microaggression, and inappropriately might act as a “trigger warning” that could set people off half-cocked.
      Wouldn’t want that, now, would we?

  3. So…. he’s confident that the laws he wants would pass *any* any second amendment challenge But! he still thinks it would be great to change the 2nd Amend.

    Huh… so is he not as confident as he said he was or does he feel that a total ban and confiscation on semi-autos and a full registration of all that remain is a *start*?

  4. It’s great that you’re able to find these examples and present them to your readers. I don’t encounter many folks with these attitudes because I avoid their haunts. It is, however, critically important that we as gun owners realize the extent to which some would go to not only infringe our rights, but to extinguish our rights and in some cases, our lives. Further, it’s enlightening to see how these folks refuse to let logic, reason and existing law affect their “thinking”.

    I have to admit, even we see them on an almost daily basis, that I’m amazed at the idiocy on display. Not only that, but the visceral hate that many of them seem to have for us. From the fat woman wanting to “mow us down” to brain dead Bill, they’re almost required reading so that we;

    “Don’t ever let someone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.”

    Jeff B.

  5. And here comes the guy from behind the iron curtain.

    Here in Massachusetts we have registration of all firearms, and registration of all LEGAL firearms owners in a form of firearms permits. Let your permit lapse, or move to a different town and not tell the cops, while still owning firearms TA DA! You’re a CRIMINAL!!!

    Of course we also have the more common definition of criminals here in Massachusetts. People who sell illegal drugs, gang members who kill other people for insults or entering territory already claimed by other gang members.

    Just the other day in one of our nice little urban shitholes we had a few people get shot at a birthday party. No licences, no registration, and like most gang-related shooting, even tho there were several witnesses who were likely having a good time with the perpetrator for hours, and probably saw whatever altercation led to the shooting…nobody saw nothing.

    When we DO catch a hardened criminal with a stolen gun and no permit, that stuff gets plead away so the other charges will stick.

    So why again must I shit bricks every 5 years when the State Police take 3x the legal allotted time to issue my permit I applied for MONTHS before the old one expired?

    I do hope Massachusetts or Illinois firearms permitting system get taken to SCOTUS.

    But then again I’m still legally required to keep all my guns locked up at all times no matter the circumstances, despite what Heller and McDonald said…so my faith is not high.

    Hell I still take wide detours around New Jersey and pucker hard for the hours it takes me to traverse New York State when I bring my guns South into America, despite there being a law on the Federal books since I was a kid saying I have nothing to fear so long as I just keep traveling while in those anti-gun dumps.

    Anti-gun people talk about wanting more laws, but they aren’t that big on following laws they don’t like.

  6. “[B]reach [sic] action shotguns”?

    Is there any other kind? I mean, my pump-action operates by extracting spent shells and feeding new ones at the breech. Semi-autos’ actions operate in the same area; at the breech.

    Is there an historical example of a muzzle-loading “shotgun,” which is all I can think of that would not be a “breech action shotgun”? (It’s also curious that 2Bill would criminalize a muzzle-loader rather than anything else.)

    As an after-thought, perhaps he means “break-action” shotguns, which would make more sense. Still, it helps to know what one is talking about, before one spouts his/her mouth.

  7. When a person worships the coercive power of government, he apparently believes that it is omnipotent.

    What would 2Bill say to the question of whether criminals would obey these new laws of his, or only the law-abbiding? I’d say that criminals, by definition, can have any kind and any number of guns they want, and without registering them.

    How would 2Bill react to the suggestion that we pass a law requiring all criminals (and tyrants) to obey all laws? Well if passing a law fixes any problem, then that one would take care of all crime. Stroke of the pen, law of the land…Cool! Then we could get off (and stay off) the backs of honest, peaceable gun owners completely and forever.

    • I was talking to my brother the other day about a conversation he had with Pop a little while back. Dad doesn’t really like to talk politics, which is kind of funny because my brothers and I are all very politically aware (at at the opposite political end of the spectrum from him). Anyway, the upshot of said conversation is that my brother said it had never occurred to dad that “government = force.” Pops is smart, well educated, and reads a lot, but he had never actually thought in terms that by definition, government was the legal ability to require or prohibit action by people, and FORCE them to comply (or suffer fines, jail, etc.) In his 80s, seen a lot, never realized that government is force.
      There was a total disconnect between “law” and “action.”
      None so blind that will not see.

  8. As someone that has spent the lifetime around firearms I find it embarrassing to ask someone to clarify this point. Just what is a breach action ? Me thinks that 2Bill is showing that he is clearly dumber than effing dirt.

  9. There’s more wrong with his arguments than I can elaborate:

    “Ban all semiautomatic weapons”

    And just what in the hell would this accomplish? Let’s just say, for kicks and giggles, that you somehow managed to pull this off, and got all 150 million semi-automatics in circulation off the streets and into the incinerator. That’s a tall order. Probably impossible. No, screw that. TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

    But let’s just concede his point, and think that we live in fantasy land. Does he really think it’s impossible to kill someone with a revolver? Or a bolt action?

    What is it with these people and the term “semi-automatic” that gets their panties in such a bunch? Do they even know what semi-automatic means, or are they just repeating buzzwords to trigger visceral reactions among their sycophantic followers?

    “ and create a national registry of all gun owners.”

    I’ve gone over this before at my blog, but my first question when someone talks registry is this:

    What are you going to do with it?

    A registry is essentially a useless tool that accomplishes nothing other than to bully people for owning guns. It is a thinly veiled message. “We know where you live, pal, and the second we get tyrannical urgings, we’ll be knocking on your door, for sure.”

    Other than that use, I can’t think of how a registry would be anything other than useless. So to me, people asking for registries are either the most brutally evil people you can imagine, or they are unintelligent dupes who haven’t thought their position through past “he said it would be a good thing, so I say it will, too!”

    “No need to change the second amendment,”

    Obviously an ignorant statement, completely unaware of 200 years of jurisprudence that states that as long as semi-automatic firearms are in “common use” they can’t be banned. As much as he hates it, they are very much in “common use.” To enact a semi-auto ban, you would, indeed, need to modify the 2nd amendment. Good luck!

    “We could reduce the number of guns on the street”

    Another lefty that has somehow convinced himself that enacting a law, and then subsequently enforcing that law to it’s intent are two very, very different things. Enacting a law to ban semi-automatics would not reduce the number of guns on the streets by any measurable, meaningful metric. It certainly would not reduce the number of the type of guns you’d actually WANT off the streets, which are the guns owned by criminals and crazy people, who, get this, don’t exactly have a strong track record of following the law!

    “and at the very least force any would be shooter to reload more often.”

    Many of these “active shooter” situations don’t involve that many rounds being fired. The time necessary to reload a firearm is pretty meaningless in the sense of an “active shooter” scenario. I can think of multiple ways to get past the slower reload times of a revolver. Like, for instance, carry several revolvers. Durrr!

    Speed loaders would probably have to be banned and “rounded up” under his ideal scenario, too, I guess.

    “Let’s start by banning all guns except revolvers”

    And explosives. And household cleaners. And PVC pipe. And natural gas leaks. And….

    , “bolt action rifles”

    Yes, because you can’t get a bolt action rifle with a high capacity magazine. That’s just silly. Why, to think that such a thing exists, you’d have to be wholly ignora…

    What? Pretty much every brand of bolt action rifle either comes with a detachable box magazine or can be easily converted to accept one, and at that point, capacity is limited only by how big you want to make the magazine?

    I guess we need to ban bolt action rifles, too, then, eh genius?

    “ and breach action shotguns”

    Never mind that “breach action” isn’t even a thing. This isn’t a sign of the author’s complete ignorance when it comes to firearms. Why would he need to know anything about the very thing that he is wanting to write laws about? That’s just goofy. We all know that the breach-action is the shoulder thingy that goes up, anyway, right?

    “Then let’s register every gun and require liability insurance for every owner.”

    Then let’s register every stupid person and require them to shut the fuck up. It would be just as simple.

    “This proposal would pass any second amendment challenge and would even satisfy the scrutiny of the Heller decision.”

    Total ignorance. It wouldn’t pass muster on either claim. This guy is a complete ignoramus, posing as a know-it-all, pretending to have enough knowledge about something that he is pig-ignorant about to actually write laws dictating their use.

    Serious epic fail.

    • “Like, for instance, carry several revolvers.”
      A thing the James gang and others actually did. Their gang used to be know as carrying multiple revolvers, as many as eight at a time and not all in the same caliber, in many cases.

Comments are closed.