At a time when preventing terrorism is supposed to be a national priority, why can’t our politicians agree to sustain a ban on a very narrow class of firearms?
Well, gee, let’s see…perhaps because it’s unnecessary in the war on terror. Perhaps because it won’t do any good inthe war on terror. Perhaps because it might be counterproductive. Why you ask? No, surely, you didn’t have to ask…you did remember, right? They don’t use assault rifles, they use BOXCUTTERS. These freaks killed almost 3,000 people with utility knives that you buy 3 for $1 at the Dollar Tree not $1,500+ assault rifles from Armalite. Why would they screw around with assault rifles when you can arm a crew that can kill 3,000 people for $7 plus tax? I wouldn’t go so far as to suggest that plane passengers ought to be armed with assault rifles…alright on a good day I would actually go that far, but I’ll be “reasonable” today and just posit that a boxcutter armed terrorist shows up at an elementary school intending to unleash the kind of havoc they had in Russia recently. Would it be good or bad for the war on terror if the principal and maybe the gym teacher had an AR-15 locked away where they could get it?