I thought this belongs in the National 2A forum and that is why I am posting it here. Extremely well done IMO and something we might be able to disseminate on the web during the next Cease Fire MD push for the MD AWB next year.
Yes, its dissemination should probably be used sparingly.I dunno....I think antis will look at it and say "We need to ban small handguns along with the assult rifles!!!", and not see it how we see it.
Wtf??? Which was and which wasnt an assault rifle in the end?
Wtf??? Which was and which wasnt an assault rifle in the end?
Unfortunately, all of this comparison could doubly be used by anti's. For instance, if you demonstrate how much more powerful a .300 Winchester Mag is than a .223, the anti's would use that- "If this is regulated, than that certainly should be, as well."
And so it goes, until all firearms of any kind are not permissible by law-abiding citizens.
Which is why we need SCOTUS to rule that it's an individual right once and for all. Then we can stop all this nonsense (or at least get a huge step closer).
Unfortunately we're having these crazy "gunmen" going around killing people it seems like almost every week. Yes, they're all criminals and usually obtain the guns illegally or take them into a gun-free zone, but all it does is get the antis' panties in a wad about rounding up all guns and destroying them
BUt here is the catch. The only reason the first ban was able to be passed is because the public misconceptions and naivete. When their previous ridiculous bill is exposed and more people realize just how silly it was, then any attampt they try next will be spent mostly trying to explain just what they were thinking the first time.The only thing that video will do is prompt them to ban more weapons to cover the ones that were not covered under the last ban.
The logic of the entire argument will escape them.
BUt here is the catch. The only reason the first ban was able to be passed is because the public misconceptions and naivete. When their previous ridiculous bill is exposed and more people realize just how silly it was, then any attampt they try next will be spent mostly trying to explain just what they were thinking the first time.
The American public gets fooled every generation on somethinjg particular, but it is not too common they get burned twice on it in one generation.
Ok, here is an example. Bush used hysteria and fear of terrorism to get support for an invasion of Iraq, but when he tries the same tactic years later trying to get America to be fearful and follow without question his saber rattling over Iran he is so discreditted that no one really is falling for it. Even if he was right about Iran being a threat, his previous superior position of having the wave of unthinking hysteria and mob mentality of the public has been replaced by having a skeptical public which realised they were emotionally manipulated and suckered in a sense.
When people realise the last ban's tactics were a ruse, they will wonder if this one is too. No matter how much they alter it and try new stuff, people will always remember they were manipulated and suckered the last time or they will learn they were. The biggest thing we have going for us is statistics and facts, and the only thing they have going for them is hysteria, emotional manipulation and fear. Theirs is effective in the short term, but our benefit of facts, studies and sensible logic will win in the long haul.
Yes, but two important aspects must be considered. One is that they base some of their funds on SOME of the public giving them money and if the majority of them realize they were suckkered, then there goes some major support. When that goes and the only funds come from a very few rich contributors, then the allure to politicians of a mass of guarnteed voters disappears.The general public does not care enough about "assualt rifles" to look into the issue and see the truth. Statistics and facts can be manipulated by both sides to support thier cause. Theirs only needs to be effective long enough to get laws passed.
BUt here is the catch. The only reason the first ban was able to be passed is because the public misconceptions and naivete.
The only thing that video will do is prompt them to ban more weapons to cover the ones that were not covered under the last ban.
The logic of the entire argument will escape them.
I've got a better idea. Show them what some things readily available at some big box, hardware, or dollar stores will do; baseball bats, kitchen knives, machetes, axes, hatchets, hammers. There's probably record of some of these being used, so you could start with the grusome details, and save the weaon for later. Should playgrounds be bat free zones? In Britain, after they banned most guns, blunt weapon trauma became a major cause of murders. "Bats don't kill people. People kill people".
Don't forget one of the number one killers:
Cars