California’s senior nanny, Dianne Feinstein, and her Democratic colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee have approved a bill that would prohibit “assault rifles,” largely on the basis that law-abiding Americans don’t “need” them. Citizens of the land of the free don’t need magazines that hold more than 10 rounds either, so say the wise ones.
Where is it written that Americans should be denied whatever these presumptuous wing-nuts have decided we don’t need? In a weapons-grade non-sequitur, Feinstein defended her pointless attack on the freedom of Americans by saying that her bill “exempts 2,271 weapons. Is that not enough for the people of the United States? Do they need a bazooka,” she whined?
“Oh — reason not the need,” Lear said when his greedy and ungrateful daughters deprived him of his hundred knights. Looking around my office as I write this, I can see countless items that I don’t need, but if I were deprived of which Americans wouldn’t be a bit safer? We certainly won’t be any safer if law-abiding Americans are denied access to the weapons Feinstein and Co. wish to make verboten.
What America really doesn’t need are elected officials who have such a poor understanding of both pubic safety and freedom as Dianne Feinstein and her fellow deniers demonstrate daily.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online