@sportslawyerlis @russellcrowe We need to abolish assault weapons now! Come on Congress get some balls to do what’s needed.
Joanne P. Fournier @jpf611
Tweeted on June 13, 2016
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
Ho hum. Another “we” that means “anyone but me”.
Please define, “assault weapons.” Be specific.
I agree, Congress needs to abolish ‘assault weapons’. It needs the cojones to take a righteous stand.
The phrase, as a matter of law, is un-Constitutionally vague. One need only at California’s legislative history of successful and unsuccessful attempts to expand the definition of ‘assault weapon’ to see that there is no fixed, objective legal meaning to the phrase.
Furthermore, we know from VPC’s own web site: ” The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.” This is a cynical campaign to win legislatively by relying on the ignorance of the public and emotional appeals.
Therefore, Congress should ban the use of the phrase ‘assault weapon’ or any other semantic equivalent in any law as un-Constitutionally vague and likely to be related to a conspiracy to deprive citizens of their protected rights. Individuals exercising public powers justified by these terms, and any other aiding or abetting them, shall be arrested and tried as conspirators to deprive rights.
Furthermore, since Congress has arrogated to itself the power to put commonsense restrictions on content transmitted openly over the airwaves, the FCC shall treat ‘assault weapons’ and any semantic equivalent as intentional attempts to deceive and manipulate the public, and therefore the FCC licensee is not operating in the public interest and shall lose its license.
Come to think of it, both of these things could be done by executive orders under existing laws. Who needs Congress? We just need the right kind of man in office. One who is strong. One willing to flip the bird to those that opposed his righteous rise to office. Too late to be concerned about the dignity of the office, really, or limitations on the power of government. 18 years too late, if not 84.