Now this one is amusing:
Now most images of firearms by anti-gun cartoonists are comically inaccurate. The drawings can be little more than scribbles, to highly detailed renditions. But most of the images are so technically inaccurate that anybody with a rudimentary understanding of firearms will laugh at the silly image.
Now this cartoon, it appears the cartoonist decided to actually look at real-life pictures before putting pen to paper, and the drawings are decent. Not perfect, but you can clearly tell that the lower “Bad” rifle is a Kalashnikov pattern rifle, likely an AK-74. Still the “Good” rifle is very obviously a Henry Rifle.
I wonder why the author decided this rifle would be the “iconic” image of a “Good” rifle, given that they are essentially a relic or collector’s item, in both the original and reproductions.
Now the irony comes that this very rifle is being discussed in the proposed New Jersey magazine ban. The new law would make it illegal to own ANY feeding device that is capable of holding more than 10 rounds. If the device is permanently attached to the rifle then the firearm itself becomes contraband.
Under this new law it would be perfectly legal to own an AK-74 so long as the owner only used 10 round magazines, but the Henry would become impossible to own.
I doubt the cartoonist sees the irony in this.
Can anyone in his right mind believe that the proponents of large-capacity magazine bans really give a rat’s hindquarters about protecting school kids?
I’m saying this as a guy who once worked as a minor political operative for both major parties in Ohio, and who knows the sick serotonin-jolt that some legislators and their law-drafting flunkies get from passing ill-conceived legislation against a mute or cowed opposition and against, e. g., nuanced natural law considerations.
Think “Potomac fever”, or the state equivalent. The young turd with a law degree from a nearby working-stiff college who boasts about making a significant contribution to the language of some legislation that screws working stiffs out of their natural rights, for example, to property of their choosing, on the theory, I guess, that people need to be protected from their choices. Thanks for allowing me this vent.
Also note the weight pressed on “feels” as in “This is what *I* think something should be!”
It’s also telling because the word the artist is fretting over is “rifle”. You know, the word that simply means “a non-handgun, non-full-auto* firearm that has a rifled barrel”
*And that latter part is up for dispute.
So… because this clown is so ignorant as to basic words mean, we should be punished?
He seems livid and confused that… people can call a gun with a rifled barrel a rifle.
Also note the whole AWB is based less on the actual features of a gun and more on the prude’s definition of pornography: “I may not be able to define it but I’ll know it when I see it.”
I’m amazed that the artist even acknowledges that rifles more often look well… like something out of this century.
But durn it! That’s not the world he likes!
The Henry WAS the high cap assault rifle of its day you know .
It Sure Was! But since it’s old, it’s OK, I guess….except when it isn’t.
If it were the only rifle available, he’d want to ban it too. “Why can’t you use a Kentucky long rifle?”
I wonder if his brain would start fizzling if you showed him an M1 garand.
Pingback: Some Rifles Are Assaulty Looking And Therefore Bad
Pingback: Some Rifles Are Assaulty Looking And Therefore Bad | State Of Tactical