When someone is killed in a car equipped with airbags, or seat belts, the response isn’t “regulation is pointless, just give up, waaah'via Blog this'
[snip]
But if someone is killed by a gun that shouldn’t have been owned under our weak gun laws, all we hear is how a single failure justifies giving up on any kind of regulation whatsoever.
I hear a lot of kerfuffle about which gun was used at Sandy Hook. Does it really matter?
There is no justification for a semi-automatic weapon (rifle or pistol) unless you are law enforcement or military.
As a personal self-defense tool the high rate of fire makes you a hazard to bystanders unless you are very proficient(most are not) and if you want to defend your home then a pump action shotgun is much more effective.
Color me baffled.
Oh right... a revolver or shotgun doesn't look as cool as a Glock or a Bushmaster.
Silly me for thinking it was actually about self-defense.
