At long last, a victim-disarming politician has conceded that something is constitutionally protected by the Second Amendment.
Mayor Pete Buttigieg at Asian and Latino Coalition in Des Moines, Iowa
We’ve already decided this is within the Secondment [sic]. We have decided that somewhere in between a slingshot and a nuclear weapon, we can draw a line. That is not unconstitutional. That is common sense. That’s why I think assault rifles need to be on the table, too.
Slingshots.
But I hate to break it to the presidential hopeful…
Those are weapons of war.
Buttigieg still hasn’t answered my question about assault rifles.
[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]
(More Tip Jar Options) |
Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!
Under US v. Miller, ONLY “weapons of war” are considered protected by the 2nd Amendment.
The Second Amendment is NOT a government “allowance” of a gun – it is a RIGHT to the CAPABILITY Of American citizens being enabled, through firearms ownership, to DEFEND THEIR FREEDOMS! All guns do not ENABLE THE CAPABILITY intended in the Second Amendment.
Outlawing semi-automatic AR15 type rifles and standard full capacity magazines is NOT a “reasonable compromise” – IT IS THE ENDGAME!
It is the difference between an effectively armed citizenry that possesses the capability to defend it’s freedoms – and a citizenry restricted by law to low capacity sporting arms that NO LONGER possesses the capability to defend it’s freedoms!