"Assault weapons are a subclass of unreasonably dangerous firearms developed and adopted for their military effectiveness, with features appropriate for military and some law-enforcement purposes, but which are not commonly owned generally, or commonly used for self-defense," Fader and his colleagues wrote. [More]Fader and his colleagues, of course, are goddam hive insect liars. Funny, how the "progressives" want it both ways, with the Miller opinion essentially saying "protected" guns had to have demonstrable military utility.
And thanks for that "in common use" anchor weight, "conservative/originalist/constructionist" Scalia. Not only does it drag us down, it effectively denies any new developments in arms to We the People.
Looks like some of us are just going to have to ignore the tyrants' edicts and do what we know is right.
1 comment:
Nearly EVERY firearms manufacturer has AR-15 variants, and many have AK variants. I don't know the sales percentages or raw numbers, but it's probably in the millions, right? So how f---ing many have to be sold in order to be considered "commonly owned"??
Also, since, "used for self-defense" COULD mean I displayed it in a threatening situation, and that act was sufficient to deter violence (and thus no reports were filed, nor breathless "news" stories aired), who the hell KNOWS how commonly they're used for self-defense?
Post a Comment