September 12th, 2008
Dion Attempts to Trick Voters with Ludicrous Assault Weapons Ban
Looking at the Liberals’ own press release, it’s pretty obvious that Dion wants to draw a fictional line between “respectable” firearms that government should tolerate (for now anyway), and “scary” firearms that “serve absolutely no purpose in our society.”…
If Dion gets elected and passes his proposed “Scary Weapons Act,” those few bad guys will gleefully hang on to their scary weapons while law-abiding homeowners are unjustly forced to forfeit their lawfully-acquired property, which may have proved very useful in defending themselves from scary criminals. The stubborn few who refuse to give up their lawfully-acquired property will become honorary scary criminals themselves.
All sounds awfully familiar, no?
UPDATE: Just noticed this in the comments of the National Post editorial linked in the story:
by Jay Brezny
Sep 10 2008
11:36 AM
This editorial completely misses the point. It doesn’t matter how you define “assault” weapons, the bottom line is no one needs semi-automatics for hunting purposes. Handguns for home defence can be defended. Rifles for hunting are obiously defendible. But semis are not — no one needs semi-automatic rifles for any legitimate purpose. Nice try, though.
That also sounds awfully familiar.
My guess is that the commenter thinks he’s talking about fully-auto weapons when he says “semi-automatics.”
Which is, of course, also awfully familiar.
