Gun Control: Partisan Hacks Are Trumpeting Their Ignorance

Written by Andrew Allen on October 6, 2017

In the wake of Las Vegas, it’s sad to see politics as usual resume and the whole thing turn into a stupid gun control argument. How stupid is this argument?

I don’t know, ask the Jack Ass Party Congresswoman who claimed that a ban on high-capacity magazines would eventually reduce the number of bullets a shooter could shoot because once each high-capacity magazine was emptied there would be fewer bullets since apparently magazines are a one-time only proposition. I guess in her district they don’t have springs. Congressman Hank Don’t-Capsize-Guam Johnson must be smiling ear to dumb-ass ear knowing that in Congress there is at least one other Democrat as utterly ignorant as he. The only argument dumber is that of Hillary Clinton – I know, surprise, surprise, Hillary and dumb hand-in-hand – and her weirdo sidekick Tim Kaine and their banter about “silencers”.

Perhaps idiots that don’t know a damned thing about firearms need not involve themselves in making laws about firearms. Had we followed that as advice, bump stocks wouldn’t be legal today.

Did you know bump stocks used to be heavily regulated? Until 2010 that is. That’s when the Obama administration – yes, the Obama administration – deregulated them because a bunch of experts that knew nothing about firearms told the ATF bump stocks would make it easier for disabled people to shoot.

That’s right. A bunch of suit-and-tie wearing, never-touched-a-barrel-or-a-stock, METRO-train-riding, Pennsylvania-Avenue-walking experts said “Hey, bump stocks are ok because they comply with the American’s with Disabilities Act and George W Bush was wrong for not allowing them” and presto, Vegas.

Firearms experts would also tell you that operating a firearm in excess of its cyclic rate of fire courtesy of a bump stock will eventually destroy the firearm. That’s why firearms have cyclic rates of fire. Much like a car, if you red line it too often for too long, the mechanical components will fail. Contrary to all the movies you have seen in which the action hero unloads round after round after round, firearms too are subject to the laws of physics. Heat and sustained mechanical component movement without lubrication eventually will render the firearm unusable.

All that aside, why legislate morality? I pose this to you readers because I don’t have the answers. Here’s what I will say:

Every single time we legislate moral behavior, we as a nation fail because we transfer responsibility for behavior from the individual to the state. Doubt me? Explain Detroit. Chicago. Baltimore. Virtually every urban failure occurring in America today has a law designed to “help people” attached to it.

We can pass law after law after law that makes us all feel better about ourselves. To what effect? In the heat of the moment maybe we get to feel like we’ve done something. We haven’t, though. Not really.

Because in every instance, we pass law after law and we feel better about ourselves until something like San Bernardino, Orlando, or Vegas happens. And then when turn to laws for solutions when laws have failed us already.

Ladies and Gentlemen, our problems are deeper than those the laws of man can correct. Until we all agree on that point we cannot move forward.

Laws ain’t cutting it, folks. Think about it.

Image: Excerpted from: CC0 Creative Commons;

Andrew Allen
Andrew Allen (@aandrewallen) grew up in the American southeast and for more than two decades has worked as an information technoloigies professional in various locations around the globe. A former far-left activist, Allen became a conservative in the late 1990s following a lengthy period spent questioning his own worldview. When not working IT-related issues or traveling, Andrew Allen spends his time discovering new ways to bring the pain by exposing the idiocy of liberals and their ideology.