There’s something about the Senators from Texas that just gives me the warm fuzzies. First Tyler gets a lovely note from John Cornyn about how guns aren’t the problem, and now Ted Cruz is leading the charge against Dianne Feinstein’s latest attempt to screw the citizens of the United States out of their civil rights. Presser after the jump . . .
Washington politicians shouldn’t be taking advantage of recent tragedy to try to push an aggressive gun control agenda. Real assault weapons—machine guns—are already functionally illegal, and they have been since 1934. This proposal would have done nothing to prevent the terrible murders in Newtown, but it would limit the constitutional liberties of law-abiding citizens. And gun control doesn’t work – the empirical data overwhelmingly demonstrate that strict gun-control laws consistently produce more crime and more murders.
The Second Amendment exists to ensure that law-abiding Americans can protect their homes and families, and I look forward to helping lead the fight to defeat this bill and to protect our constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
[Source]
I like it — it would be nice to see something like this expanded into a comprehensive booklet. The facts are entirely on our side, so it would be convenient to have one place to send people to.
Much of what you say about the AR is found in the Introduction and Ballistics sections of this Massachusetts Police training manual: http://www.mlefiaa.org/files/MPTC_NEWS/Patrol_Rifle_Student_Manual_2010.pdf
It would be nice to have gun violence statistics for the UK, to show that it has gone up since their draconian gun control laws have been enacted. Honest supporters of gun control will acknowledge that it does little or nothing to stop violence, but is only a stepping-stone to UK-style bans, which they think will work. We’d do well to demonstrate that this is a myth.
It would also be helpful to point out that the gun control being proposed (and in the case of NY, enacted) applies to common handguns, of the sort that rides on the hip of every police officer. I think your talking points about assault weapons are important, but if that’s all you talk about, people will just assume “well, gun owners will still have your standard self-defense handguns.” I think most people would be shocked to learn that these are exactly the firearms that are being targeted.
It might also be helpful to point out that these measures apply to military service personnel, correctional officers, the families of law enforcement, and public servants of all sorts. There are lots of people who sacrifice for our country, some of whom place themselves at greater personal risk, who would be disarmed by the law.