“A Democratic-proposed gun ban would prohibit some of the most highly-rated hunting rifles and shotguns, ban most pistols, and require Wisconsin residents who owned so-called ‘semiautomatic assault weapons’ to turn their guns in to the government,” mediatrackers.org reports. “State Rep. Lisa Subeck [above] and three other Democrat state lawmakers are proposing a sweeping ban on rifles, shotguns and pistols they deem dangerous because they are ‘designed to kill large numbers of people quickly.'” OK, it’s a proposed law. A piece of legislation that doesn’t have a ghost of a chance of passing in the Eat Cheese or Die state legislature. But think carefully about this . . .
If a majority of residents in not one, not two, but three separate Wisconsin voting districts didn’t support this proposed gun grab, it would have never seen the light of day. In other words, there are plenty of people who want to take – as in confiscate and destroy – your guns.
So when the President of the United States addressed the nation after the Umpqua Community College spree killing and [once again] pronounced “nobody wants to take your guns,” he was lying. There are people in the Badger State who do and put it out there for all the world to see. Are we to assume that they are alone in this desire to disarm the civilian population? We are not. To do so would be extremely foolhardy.
“Gun safety” advocates are not normally this obvious. To be fair, that may be because Rep Subeck is an idiot. Her bill’s wording is so bad it’s hard to know if we should apply Hanlon’s Razor (never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity).
The way the draft legislation defines “semiautomatic assault rifle” (a term that’s somewhat redundant), dozens of different gun types would be banned. State Rep. Cody Horlacher (R), also an attorney, reviewed the proposal and told Media Trackers the definition of a banned rifle “is so broad, anything could fall into” it . . .
When it comes to shotguns, the proposed ban would make it illegal for a Wisconsin hunter to own some of the most highly rated Turkey hunting shotguns. In fact, four of Game & Fish Magazine’s top ten shotguns for Turkey hunting would be specifically banned.
Most semiautomatic pistols also appear to be off-limits if the proposal ever becomes law – a nearly impossible prospect at this point with the legislature controlled by Republicans. A loosely worded prohibition on pistols with, “a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel, and that permits the user to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned” would make iconic handguns like the 1911, or popular pistols like the entire Glock product line, illegal. Perhaps the only semiautomatic pistol that would be legal would be the Luger, a German World War II relic.
“Even though a semiautomatic pistol slide is not designed for the purpose of being held by the nontrigger hand, particularly while the firearm is being fired, it could be argued that a slide still meets the criteria for inclusion under this provision,” Konopacki wrote in his letter to Rep. Craig. “Arguments could be made both ways here, and it is impossible to predict with certainty how a court construing this phrase would do so.”
Make no mistake. Whether or not this non-starter law is deliberate or an unintentional mask slip, “gun safety” advocates believe that Americans are safest without guns. Period. That is their ultimate goal.
Any and all gun control legislation short of confiscation is a means to an end, and should be rejected, regardless of any claims of “common sense safety measures” or feigned respect for our Second Amendment protections. In short, they really do want to take your guns. One way or another.