By Douglas V. Gibbs
Politico is reporting that one of the fiercest gun-control advocates in Congress, Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), has decided that the shooting in Tucson, Arizona that resulted in a gunshot wound to the head of Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), is good enough reason to introduce legislation as soon as Monday targeting the high-capacity ammunition clip the gunman used.
The wife of a shooting victim, McCarthy ran for Congress largely to push her anti-gun agenda.
As expected, gun control activists wish to once again work to further restrict our Constitutional right to bear arms with more federal gun restrictions, legislation that would be in direct violation of the 2nd Amendment, which states that the federal government shall not infringe on the people's right to keep and bear arms.
The gun did not pull its own trigger. Mentally unstable Jared Lee Loughner pulled that trigger.
Nonetheless, because of an individual decision by an individual nutcase with a gun in his hand, the anti-gun advocates are pushing that and no one should be able to buy stockpiles of ammunition used by the 22-year-old assailant.
McCarthy’s complaint is specifically against the high-capacity ammunition clips the Arizona gunman allegedly used in the shooting, which allows a greater number of bullets to be available for the firearm at one time.
“Again, we need to look at how this is going to work, to protect people, certainly citizens, and we have to look at what I can pass,” McCarthy said. “I don’t want to give the NRA – excuse the pun – the ammunition to come at me either.”
So her way of protecting the people is to take away more gun rights from law abiding citizens, while the criminal element, which already doesn't follow the law, will continue to get its hands on these high-capacity ammunition clips.
Oh, yeah, that's a brilliant piece of legislation. Score one for the bad guys.
Pennsylvania Democrat Robert Brady also plans to take legislative action. His bill would make it a crime for anyone to use language or symbols that could be seen as threatening or violent against a federal official, including a member of Congress.
Hmmm, which means "I disagree with you, Congressman," could become punishable by law, if they so desire to "interpret" the law in that manner.
Why not? That's how these freaks in Washington "interpret" the Constitution (any way they damn well want, in other words).
Another anti-gun politician, Democrat Illinois Representative Mike Quigley, would like to see a new assault weapon ban, heavier regulations on sales at gun shows and tracing measures.
I'm wondering how long it'll be before the next tragedy, and the decision by the Democrats to just kick down our doors and take our firearms from us.
Yeah, right, they'll have to pry all dozen of my firearms from my cold dead fingers.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Carolyn McCarthy readies gun control bill - Politico
1 comment:
Should we then find out the make and model of every car that has hit and killed a person and ban them? Certainly not. They simply don't want anyone but the gov't to have the power to defend itself.
Post a Comment