Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.
The NYT just published a front-page editorial (The first since 1920!) Advocating for the banning and confiscating of firearms.
You might just be able to drop the topic finally. 😉
The topic being “Don’t let anyone tell you they want to take your guns.” But that assumes there are enough people reading the New York Times for the word to get around.
My take on this editorial is this will further reduce their readership. More and more people realize that with the war with our current enemy for people to advocate gun control is an incredibly stupid idea. Even Chris Christie, who governs a state with incredible strict gun laws, called this editorial, “typical liberal claptrap from the New York Times”.
Yesterday Barb and I were at the range with a relatively new shooter and her husband. The check-in counter and gun store was packed with people. I supposedly had the training bay reserved for them but it was packed with a class. The range gave us a smaller bay and we got her shooting much better and far more comfortable with a gun. She is going to get a CPL.
My point is that rational people realize the answer to violent criminals is to respond with immediate protective violence and the best tool for that is a gun. People advocating removing the tools for delivering that immediate protective violence are being ignored and even anti-gun groups and President Obama recognize this:
President Barack Obama made a promise in October to use his bully pulpit to politicize gun control. But he hasn’t followed through — he hasn’t scheduled a single speech on the topic, instead simply reacting to shooting after mass shooting. And he’s stopped pushing for any real legislation with members of Congress.
Obama frequently repeats his promise to do something. But aides say he’s essentially given up on any significant gun control passing during his presidency.
…leaders of the groups grumble. They still get invited to intermittent brainstorming sessions at the White House where they hear talk about securing a legacy with some more moves, and then they wait as nothing real happens.
In a stopped clock is right twice a day type moment Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence President Dan Gross is right when he says:
We have seen over this past week how quickly an important social conversation can really change how we look at an issue.
The conversations I had at work, with friends wanting guns and training, and the packed gun ranges and stores over this past week we do see that, speaking literally, Gross is right. But not in the way he would like to believe. The anti-gun people are on a downward slope to oblivion and the NYT editorial is the shrieking as they approach the abyss.—Joe]