Replies

The Brady Bunch claimed that these guns are the "weapon of choice" for criminals and thus ought to be banned. This, of course, isn't true. The affected guns are used in ~1% of all violent crimes. Why point this out? Because no gun law shuld be enacted on specious reasoning.

The law as a whole is similarly flawed. There is no difference in performance between the banned guns and other semi-autos. The reasons for banning this gun but not that one is strictly due to cosmetics. But once the ban passed, we were a step close to banning guns based on performance. Letting the "weapon of choice" lie stand would have helped towards that end. The grabbers would have been able to say "This gun is functionally identical to this ugly, banned gun and is thus the weapon of choice for criminals." And, in fact, that's what's been happening in California. New gun laws here are performance based; but it was the bill on appearence that got the ball rolling.

You can't let these people get away with any of their lies. The one you leave unchallenged is the one they'll hang you from.

You can't let these people get away with any of their lies.

I know. It just irks me when other pro-gun groups take the NRA's refutation of the gunophobes lies and twist that to mean that the NRA supports gun control. Or when the NRA successfully gets some of the worst parts of a gun control bill removed, they assert that they support the rest of the bill. For example, this bill would not be expiring at all if the NRA hadn't lobbied to have a time limit included, but that was twisted to mean that they supported the bill.