That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend--and Facebook "likes" and "shares" are hugely appreciated.The intent here is not to antagonize hunters, or to be anything less than welcoming to their participation in the fight for gun rights. The point is that we are continually told that banning so-called "assault weapons," or .50 caliber rifles, or "high capacity" (gun ban jihadist-speak for "standard capacity") magazines is perfectly legitimate, because "no one needs those for hunting."
Any restriction on guns, ammunition and accessories justified by their failure to meet the government's idea of "sporting purposes" is very clearly a violation of the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment, as the court ruling in Pennsylvania helps illustrate. [More]
Stumble it!
2 comments:
Saying that the Second Amendment protects sporting firearms but not combat weapons is like saying that the First Amendment protects newspapers' right to publish baseball scores and comic strips, but not a right to publish editorials criticizing the government, or articles exposing political corruption.
Of course, the politicians posing with shotguns and claiming to be hunters are phonies, and the distinction between sporting weapons and "assault weapons" is a divide-and-conquer tactic.
Post a Comment