Gun Laws: Restricting the Iron(y)
Posted by PintofStout on May 8, 2007
Isn’t it ironic (doncha think?) that the laws meant to limit and control guns have to be enforced with bigger and more powerful guns – the very guns being outlawed? I saw recently where someone opined that Virginia Tech-type stuff didn’t happen when magazines were limited by the assault weapons ban, where one shooter can fire many successive rounds without reloading. Well, considering that the shooter took his time reloading several times without being confronted by “security” would probably mean nothing to someone looking for someone or something to blame for such events. The fact that the guns used weren’t especially powerful means very little as well. Consider how much worse it would have been had the shooter used hunting rifles or shotguns. Picking guns and deciding which one is better or worse than the others is an exercise in futility. The only deadly element of April 16th was the shooter, and possibly an atrophied sense of taking one’s personal security upon one’s self and not misplacing faith in higher powers of “authority.”
Until all the guns, especially those possessed by the state, are eliminated, none of the guns should be restricted, except for those used by the state. It would be easier to legislate a frost warning in hell.