XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.usa, talk.politics.misc   
   XPost: sac.politics   
   From: chicken_tacos@democrats.rus   
      
   In article    
   governor.swill@gmail.com wrote:   
   >   
   > ...I spent all night taking it up the ass.   
      
   It's not clear which guns she is talking about, and even Collins   
   does not seem to know.   
      
   If we are "sick of massacres," says the headline over Gail   
   Collins' latest New York Times column, we should "get rid of the   
   guns." Which guns? Collins herself is not sure. Sometimes she   
   seems to be talking about the rifles that politicians call   
   "assault weapons." She refers a few times to "assault rifles"   
   and mentions "the infamous semiautomatic AR-15." But she also   
   talks about banning "semiautomatic rifles" and "semiautomatics"   
   in general, which are much broader categories that include many   
   other commonly used guns.   
      
   As long as they do not have military-style features such as a   
   folding stock, a pistol grip, or a threaded barrel, semi-   
   automatic rifles are not covered by state "assault weapon" laws.   
   The bill aimed at reviving the federal ban that expired in 2004   
   explicitly exempts dozens of semi-automatic rifles by name, and   
   it applies to handguns only if they have specified   
   characteristics such as a threaded barrel, a second pistol grip,   
   or a barrel shroud.   
      
   Collins does not seem to understand any of this, which is both   
   surprising and typical. It is surprising because Collins has   
   worked at the Times since 1995, oversaw the paper's editorial   
   page for six years, and has frequently written about gun   
   control. It is typical because Collins has repeatedly   
   demonstrated that she is unfamiliar with the firearms she wants   
   to ban and unwilling to think through the practical consequences   
   of the policies she favors, both of which are common failings   
   among gun control enthusiasts.   
      
   After the 2011 mass shooting in Tucson, Arizona, Collins   
   expressed amazement at the idea that Americans have "a right to   
   bear Glocks." She drew a distinction between the Glock 19 used   
   by the Tucson shooter and "a regular pistol, the kind most   
   Americans think of when they think of the right to bear arms."   
   Unlike a "regular pistol," she explained, a Glock 19 "is   
   extremely easy to fire over and over, and it can carry a 30-   
   bullet clip."   
      
   Although Collins claims a Glock 19 is not "a regular pistol," it   
   is one of the most popular handguns in the United States. And   
   contrary to what she seems to think, all semi-automatic pistols   
   fire at the same rate, and they typically accept magazines of   
   various sizes.   
      
   In 2012, Collins described "assault weapons" as "guns that allow   
   you to shoot off 100 bullets in a couple of minutes"—i.e., about   
   one round per second. That description would cover any semi-   
   automatic firearm with a detachable magazine, including   
   "regular" pistols as well as many of the rifles specifically   
   exempted from the proposed federal ban on "assault weapons."   
      
   Three years later, Collins averred that "assault weapons…seem to   
   be the armament of choice for mass shootings." Not according to   
   a recent National Institute of Justice report on public mass   
   shootings from 1966 through 2019, which found that 77 percent of   
   the perpetrators used handguns. In the same column, Collins   
   asserted that "semiautomatic weapons are totally inappropriate   
   for either hunting or home defense," which would come as a   
   surprise to the millions of Americans who use them for those   
   purposes.   
      
   Collins continues her confusion in her latest column. She says   
   Congress could "toughen background check laws" or "limit the   
   sale of semiautomatics to people with hunting licenses"—a   
   puzzling suggestion in light of Collins' insistence that   
   "semiautomatic weapons" are "totally inappropriate" for hunting.   
   But Collins thinks it would be better to "just get rid of them."   
      
   There are a few problems with that proposal. Given how Collins   
   has defined the guns she wants to eliminate, her ban would apply   
   to a host of firearms "in common use" for "lawful purposes,"   
   which the Supreme Court has said are covered by the Second   
   Amendment. The forbidden firearms would include most handguns,   
   which the Court described as "the quintessential self-defense   
   weapon."   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)