Two videos that dovetail very well.
First this one:
The term “Assault Weapon” is a completely made-up term. It combines “Assault” and “Weapon” which gives it a sinister tone for the sole purpose of making people WANT to take action against them, and to vilify people who make a rational argument against the stupidity. Still rifles and handguns that were previously defined as such may neither be weapons, nor used to assault. And as he points out weapons used to assault may not be considered “Assault Weapons”. What’s even worse is even here in Massachusetts where “Assault Weapons” are defined by law, I still don’t know what people are talking about when they use the term, because there about about a dozen new bills that will CHANGE the definition from what it means here.
Why? Well so we can float this crap:
Did you see how he conflated Bushmaster’s semi-auto rifles with the full-auto rifles he used in the military? The same items that mere civilians can’t own unless they’re pre-86, we go through a ton of paperwork, pay a tax, get registered, and pay the market price which is close to the price of a damn CAR!
They’re trying it again, getting guns banned because of scary words and intentional confusion!
h/t ENDO
I think about how we have been fighting this “assault weapons” BS for over 20 years and made little headway in how the antis approach the subject. The one bit of progress we have made is that they tend to include the word “style” in their narrative. So now they say “military-style”, which is an admission that these are not actual military weapons, but are only styled like them. That is huge, as this is what we have been saying all along. Yet though they just said the word, they act as if they didn’t, and the media plays along right with them: “These military-style ‘assault weapons’ are weapons of war, and don’t belong on our streets!” NO- you just said “style”- which means it is not a “weapon of war”.
There is still a long way to go, but I think about how they used to do a very similar hysterical narrative against Glocks that has been essentially dropped. How did we get there? Was it because it was so patently and provably false?
“Here- see this? That’s metal? Watch me walk through this metal detector? Do you hear that beeping? That’s the metal detector going off. Can we drop it now?” The “assault weapons” lie is almost as patently false, yet they keep the lie going.
Maybe the difference is that police forces started using Glocks, but they have started using AR-15s too.
Or maybe the real reason they dropped it is because they succeeded in getting legislation passed banning fictional guns, even though they obviously didn’t get a ban on Glocks. Maybe we should just reintroduce the Hughes Amendment verbatim and say “Look, we are doing something. We are taking weapons of war off the streets. Happy?”
Well they aren’t banning the Glocks, but they’re banning the part that makes them great.
I want an M&P9 so damn bad…but I refuse to stuff a 10 round mag into a well meant for 17.
So I carry single-stack. 45s, and aren’t we all so much safer!
“The same items that mere civilians can’t own unless they’re pre-86, we go through a ton of paperwork, pay a tax, get registered, and pay the market price which is close to the price of a damn CAR!”
Actually, if you look at the market prices for machineguns, you’ll find that the vast majority of them, with the almost exclusive exception of MAC-style machine pistols
(which generally go for 3,500 to 6, 000), go for 6,500 to ~25,000 dollars.
Practically every used car, as well as many new cars, are available in this price range.