19 April 2007

Oh, and about all these "gun laws"

...that would have supposedly stopped Cho from committing his atrocities, he had been planning this for a while. It wasn't like he just snapped and bought a gun and started shooting. Read here.

Confederate Yankee has this. And this. Apperently, the left-wing Media are not only playing this story, trying to gin up support to take away more of our Constitutionally-guaranteed rights to bear arms, but they're LYING ABOUT IT!! They can't use the truth to gain support, so they have to make up a bunch of bold-faced lies, like this one:
High capacity ammo clips became widely available for sale when Congress failed to renew a law that banned assault weapons.
Uh, no. Those clips you're talking about have been around for 50 YEARS!! From CY:
First, "clips," literally thin strips of metal designed to hold cartridges for ease in loading, were never addressed in the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.

For that matter, the law never banned existing high magazines either, "magazines" being the word that Ross and Hughes needed, but were too technically ignorant to use.

As a matter of practical fact, if Hughes and Ross had bothered to speak with any experts at all, they would have discovered that high-capacity magazines were never in short supply prior to 1994, and the commercial sale of high-capacity magazines was never slowed, much less stopped, during the ten years the ban was in effect from 1994-2004.

The commercial sale of high capacity magazines was legal during the ban, and the supply of pre-existing magazines was so plentiful that prices for many magazines never increased. In some instances, prices actually dropped.
Of course, if Brian Ross had a shred of integrity, he'd retract his blog post.

No comments: