Something to keep bookmarked for the next time a gun-grabber insists no one’s actually talking about grabbing guns, just “common sense gun control”. No, they’re talking about grabbing guns.
“We cannot have big guns out here as far as the big guns that are out here, the semi-automatics and all of them,” Muhlbauer told the newspaper during a December 19 audiotaped interview. “We can’t have those running around out here. Those are not hunting weapons.”
“We should ban those in Iowa,” he said, adding that such a ban should be applied retroactively.
“We need to get them off the streets — illegally — and even if you have them, I think we need to start taking them,” Muhlbauer told the Daily Times Herald. “We can’t have those out there. Because if they’re out there they’re just going to get circulated around to the wrong people. Those guns should not be in the public’s hands. There are just too many guns.”
I’d like to know where this “guns are only legitimately owned for hunting” bullcrap comes from. Barack Obama uses the line, too. As do countless gun-grabbing politicians who insist they’re totally not anti-Second Amendment because they support the right to own guns for hunting and sport shooting.
Here’s the thing: The Second Amendment says nothing — not one iota — about hunting or sport shooting. “(t)he right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” No specifics as to some approved reason for gun ownership. It’s not up to some bureaucrat or even elected representative to decide if you’re justified in exercising your right. Which is what makes it a right. That’s something the left’s never really understood.
And I don’t know about you, but I’ve always found something creepy and tyrannical about government officials proclaiming small arms don’t belong “in the public’s hands”. As if the “public” is subservient to the government. As if it’s up to people in power to decide if we’re allowed to exercise explicit constitutional rights. That’s not the way the Constitution works, and it’s never been the way we’ve viewed our relationship to government.
Also: I like how anti-gun politicians use “semi-automatic weapons” as scare words. It’s supposed to invoke imagery of war-like weaponry in the minds of ignorant voters. The politicians are either being deceitful or they’re just that ignorant themselves. The good news is that the Roberts Court is unlikely to countenance an attempt to ban AR-15s. It’s unlikely the Assault Weapons Ban would even be upheld today.