Our nation has watched as community after community has had to confront the tragedies that occur when weapons designed to kill large numbers of people quickly get into the hands of a dangerous person. No Wisconsin community should ever have to face such a tragedy at the hands of someone armed with a semiautomatic assault weapon.
I can conceive of no legitimate reason that any citizen should need to own or use a semiautomatic assault weapon.
Lisa Subeck
State Representative, Democrat Wisconsin
Media release November 4, 2015.
[H/T to Barron for the email pointer.
I can think of many reasons why citizens should own and use the type of firearms she wishes to ban. And like a fish who doesn’t know what water is Ms. Subeck doesn’t have the imagination to recognized the most obvious reason. That is, the number one reason for owning and becoming skilled in the use of these type of firearms is to defend ourselves against people like her who are contemptuous of basic human rights.
In addition to the general stupidity of her media release her bill demonstrates she is clueless in many dimensions. Here, for example, is her description of the pistols to be banned from the proposed bill:
3. A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and that has any of the following:
a. A folding, telescoping, or thumbhole stock.
b. A 2nd handgrip or protruding grip that can be held by the nontrigger hand.
c. The capacity to accept an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip.
d. A threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
e. A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel, and that permits the user to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being
burned.
f. A manufactured weight of at least 50 ounces when the pistol is unloaded.
She has crap for brains and should be treated as such.
But the real lesson to remember from this is:
Under the bill, whoever transports, purchases, possesses, or transfers a semiautomatic assault weapon is guilty of a felony and may be fined up to $10,000, sentenced to a term of imprisonment of up to six years, or both.
Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
Hawaii has a nearly identically-worded ban on “assault pistols”. My state senator who votes for all this crap doesn’t even know the difference between a semi-automatic and fully automatic weapon. He thinks anyone can walk in to any gun store and buy a “machine gun”. (Hawaii bans ALL NFA items, including suppressors.) That’s the level of ignorance of “our” “public servants” who govern with our consent. They don’t have my consent, but I live in a collectivist paradise.
I don’t know the origin of the various languages in these bills. But after you have read a few it sure seems that there is a common source of the odd language.
I suspect they were all spawned in the offices of one of today’s top fascists, Michael Bloomberg.
A while ago there was an article in the paper about someone claiming to be a “gun guy”. He was one of those pretend-gunowners saying he favored “common sense restrictions”. A bit like that fake “hunters” association that popped up a while ago but disappeared soon after.
He showed off his Mauser Broomhandle antique. I wrote a letter in reply (it wasn’t printed) asking if he realized that the “assault weapon” bans on the table at the time, exactly like this one, would outlaw his nice antique.
That “shroud” rule could (and probably would) be read to include the recoil spring cover on a 1911 Colt.
“I can conceive of no legitimate reason that any citizen should need to own or use a semiautomatic assault weapon.
Lisa Subeck
State Representative, Democrat Wisconsin”
Wonderful. I am not concerned with what you can or cannot conceive of. Such a law would be, in my view an illegal an improper infringement on the rights of gun owners in Wisconsin. If you get it passed, I/we will view it as an improper imposition by a government that has become illegitimate and by extension, one who’s authority We don’t recognize. From there to the rise of violent confrontation between citizens and a regime who’s legitimacy is not acknowledged is not far.
Is that what you want, Lisa? To plant the seeds of civil war? Because that’s what your going to get. Here’s a tidbit for you to consider. I’m not going to jail for exercising my rights. You put people in a corner with no way out, don’t be surprised at what you get for a response.
“Such a law would be, in my view an illegal an improper infringement on the rights of gun owners in Wisconsin.”
What then, in your view, would be a legal and proper infringement on the rights of gun owners in Wisconsin?
Interesting wording – and this Chinese menu of hated gun features has been around for decades, they add and delete at whim. Interestingly, this particular bill doesn’t ban full auto or select-fire pistols, or any of those features if attached to a full auto.
Item E is of particular interest – for the second time, in dealing with firearms, a legislator is proposing to actually ban a feature that safeguards a user from injury. The first one of these, of course, is the banning of suppressors. I wonder how far she’d get in proposing to ban seat belts, air bags, and daytime running lights on cars.
Maybe we should turn her in to OSHA or the Wisconsin equivalent, for attempting to eliminate safety devices.
It’s funny, in a sick and pathetic sort of way, isn’t it?
She’s claiming that her lack of intelligence, education, and creativity should be use to restrict my God-given and constitutionally guaranteed right to defend hearth and home with the most effective tools available. Or participate in shooting sports with the toys of my choosing, by owning and carrying arms that do the job. And yet she claims to be a leader, and sufficient voters in her state feel she’s qualified.
*shakes head*
Some people’s children.
The train is fine.
Having successfully harvested my deer this past gun season opener on Saturday in Wisconsin, let me tell you that this bill was never intended to go anywhere. The republicans have majorities in both the house and congress, and we have a republican governor. She represents the uber-liberal west side of Madison.
This week, approximately 700,000 gun-season licensees will flood the woods openly carrying their rifles while wearing bright orange clothing. There are only 5.5 million citizens living in Wisconsin. She was quickly reminded that, no matter what brownie points she was trying to score with her liberal betters in other parts of the country, we don’t take too kindly to those kind of bills around here. So much so that she withdrew the bill once some of her constituents reminded her that such a bill wouldn’t play too well with the strong “sporting heritage” in our state. Even proud union liberal fudds hunt around here, and bans on semi-autos just don’t fly. Nevertheless, I find very indicative of how the liberal hive thinks of us.
http://www.guns.com/2015/11/10/lawmakers-jump-back-from-proposed-gun-ban-after-outcry/