Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Rick Rolle

(90 posts)
16. Spot on!
Sat Feb 13, 2021, 05:16 PM
Feb 2021
The gun-control groups aren't very good at controlling guns but they do a damn fine job of selling them and getting Republicans elected.


Also, the pandemic, coupled with the riots last summer, have worked to drive up demand. As a proud liberal AND gun owner, I realize that continued screeching about banning weapons, based on their appearance instead of functionality, is a perpetual loser. Also, banning a magazine, based on an arbitrarily derived number, makes no sense. Why 10? Why not 9, or 11? It's easier to sell an idea if you can support it with some facts.

For those of you who want to insist that the Framers only meant for us to have single-shot muskets, I could counter that they also meant only to protect a free press if the message was printed by hand, using quill pens, or perhaps on manual, movable type presses. Claiming that semi-automatic weapons aren't protected would be like claiming that television, radio, or internet speech is not protected by the First Amendment, because those things didn't exist in 1787.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Glocks, Ammo, AR-15s Sell...»Reply #16