2nd Amendment Assault
Gun grabbers in Congress
are at it again, shamelessly seeking to make political hay out of the
Jan. 8 assassination attempt on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) by
insane shooter Jared Lee Loughner.
AFP covered the shooting in-depth in the Jan. 24 edition, profiling
Loughner, who had used a 9-mm Glock to kill six and wound another 13
people before a courageous congressional aide tackled him to the ground.
In the wake of the shooting, several anti-gun bills have either been
introduced or are in the process of being introduced by legislators.
First out of the gate was Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (DN. Y.), who announced
in mid-January that she would be introducing legislation to resurrect
the so-called federal assault weapons ban.
The “ban” on such weapons had originally been passed under
the Clinton administration in the early 1990s. The theory was that it
prevented crime by barring people from purchasing magazines which held
“large” capacities of ammunition, generally about 20 rounds
or more. In addition, it outlawed some features on firearms, such as
certain types of stocks that make them look like “assault
weapons”—whatever that even means.
Thankfully, the law had been allowed to expire under the Bush
administration, because most people realized it was nothing more than
feel-good legislation intended to make folks who have never fired a gun
feel warm and fuzzy about the fact that “high-powered assault
weapons” were being taken off the street.
What those New York and Washington reporters, who applauded the law in
the first place, never knew was that a .30-06 hunting rifle with a wood
stock has far better accuracy and more killing power at greater
than any “assault weapon,” like an AR-15 or a Tec-9.
During her press conference, Rep. McCarthy put on her scared face to
sell the bill she plans on resurrecting from the dead.
“The only purpose for the existence of these devices is to be
able to shoot as many people as possible as quickly as possible,”
said Rep. McCarthy in sending a copy of her bill to her colleagues.
“There is no reason that these devices should be available to the
Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) echoed Rep. McCarthy’s views, saying
he would enter legislation to renew the gun ban in the Senate. However,
Lugar recognized banning firearms is going to be a tough sell in the
“I believe [the ban] should be [renewed],” the Rhodes
Scholar and longtime insider told a New York news agency. “But I
recognize the fact that the politics domestically in our country with
regard to this are on a
different track altogether.”
But anyone who has shot a firearm knows McCarthy and Lugar are wrong.
High-capacity magazines are nothing more than a convenient tool for
shooters so they do not need to reload as often. A muzzle-loading rifle
used in the Revolutionary War is just as deadly as any “assault
The Glock that Loughner used during his killing spree typically holds
15 rounds. But any shooter with a little practice can reload a Glock in
three seconds or less. So the idea that banning high-capacity magazines
would have made much of a difference is, in reality, wishful thinking
on the part of gun grabbers.
Subscribe to American
Free Press. Online
subscriptions: One year of weekly editions—$15 plus you get a
BONUS ELECTRONIC BOOK - HIGH PRIESTS OF WAR - By Michael Piper.
subscriptions: 52 issues crammed into 47 weeks of the year plus six
free issues of Whole Body Health: $59 Order on this website
or call toll free 1-888-699-NEWS .
Sign up for our free e-newsletter here
- get a free gift just for signing up!
# 5, January 31, 2011)