Guns like the AR-15 aren’t used for hunting and they’re not viable for home protection. They have only one purpose, and that’s to fire as many rounds as possible, as quickly as possible.
Outlawing these weapons, an action supported by 60 percent of Americans, will bring down the number of mass shootings and reduce the number of casualties, just as it did when the ban first passed in 1994.
Chris Murphy and Dianne Feinstein
June 14, 2019
Our Republican Colleagues in the Senate Must Act to Break the Cycle of Gun Deaths
[I’m not certain about the 60% number. It’s going to depend on which poll you believe. The rest of the asserted data is composed entirely of lies.
This is to be expected. Anti-gun people lie habitually and have been doing that for decades. Just don’t let friends and family buy into those lies. And if someone is someone is lying to you about something as important as the Bill of Rights you have to know they are evil people and when in political power, such as Murphy and Feinstein, almost for certain have evil intent for the general population.—Joe]
Since they are afforded bodyguard protection, everything they say on the matter of gun control is a lie. A giant hypocritical lie.
I will celebrate the death of Di-Fi as a traitor to the Republic and know with certainty her eternal fate. Am I mean? We are well past civility towards those that attack our most primal right, namely our right of self defense.
Everything you need to know about a politician (who carries an extra responsibility over your citizen friends because of their duties) can be summed up in their stance on murder by abortion or disarming the citizens through gun control.
Blood-thirsty ghouls or tyrants (or both).
If the Supreme Law of the Land had established our form of government as a democracy, the opinion of 60% of a functionally illiterate public might be as relevant as that of a handful of dishonest and incompetent people who seem to get elected and re-elected despite their nearly universal lack of meaningful accomplishments in real life.
But we actually (are supposed to) have a *republican* form of government (Art4, Sec4), whose only stated *legitimate* purpose is “to preserve these rights” that are endowed to each of us by our Creator (Dec. of Ind.). The Bill of Rights includes a proscription against any effort to “infringe” (hem in, draw a border around) the right of each individual citizen to keep and bear arms. The Letters of Marque and Reprisal clause (Art1, Sec8) in the Constitution provides forceful evidence that the Founders’ definition of “arms” wasn’t limited to just smooth-bore muskets, but included the most advanced war ships of the day.
So, even if 99.99% of my fellow countrymen agree with Pelosi et al on this matter, their collective opinion is still *legally* irrelevent. Would such a law be enforced by armed government employees? Of course, just like thousands of other illegal laws are illegally enforced. But let’s not for a second give in to this “majority’s will” nonsense; that might be how a democracy works, but that is not how our republican form of government is supposed to work.