|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Kamala Harris Tries To Export California Gun Control To The Nation
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., is pushing to export California’s gun control to the rest of the nation. And she is doing it via her efforts to renew the failed federal “assault weapons” ban.
The ban, which was in place from 1994 to 2004, correlated with lower crime, yet even the The New York Times admitted that there is no evidence that the drop in crime was a result of the “assault weapons” ban (and in fact, crime continued to drop long after the ban was allowed to expire.) Rather, the Times suggested that the ban was an extension of “the assault weapon myth” propagated by Democrats in the 1990s; a time when they were desperate to reduce the “gun crime” that was raging out of control. |
Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(8/18/2017)
|
" ... there is no evidence that the drop in crime was a result of the 'assault weapons' ban (and in fact, crime continued to drop long after the ban was allowed to expire.) ...."
And the drop in crime also BEGAN earlier than the assault weapon ban's enactment. A contemporary FBI report stated that assault weapons were used in one half of one percent of gun crimes.
They were a NONFACTOR. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|