It’s not surprising that the League of Women Voters (LWV) called for a ban on so-called “assault weapons” after a violent Wednesday in which a radical leftist shot and killed Charlie Kirk in Utah and a 16-year-old shot and wounded two of his fellow students in a Colorado high school.
“This week, we saw two prominent examples, including a school shooting in Colorado that injured students, and the assassination of public figure Charlie Kirk at a university in Utah,” the organization said in a news release a few days later.
At the top of the group’s list of demands, as listed in the news release, was “banning assault weapons and limiting magazine size.” While the call for a ban on so-called “assault weapons” wasn’t surprising, it was quite stupid. Here’s why.
In the high-profile Kirk assassination, the weapon used was a bolt-action .30-06 rifle commonly used by hunters for deer, elk and other big game. With the first bolt-action rifle built way back in 1836, it’s far from a new advancement. And it’s certainly not an “assault rifle,” although the assassin turned it into that for his nefarious deed.
It also doesn’t hold very many rounds. Most bolt guns hold one round in the chamber and only three or four more in the magazine.
The LWV’s call for banning “assault weapons” and limiting magazine size is also disingenuous regarding the Colorado school murders the same day. In that assault, the 16-year-old killer used a revolver—about as far from an “assault weapon” as you can get.
Like bolt-action rifles, revolvers also aren’t exactly “modern” guns, with many in use by the 1600s, and the first commercially successful model coming in 1836. Revolvers also don’t have so-called “high-capacity” magazines, with the cylinder of most holding five or six rounds.
So why did the LWV call for a ban on “assault weapons” and limiting magazine capacity following a shooting that laws pertaining to either would not have made a difference? Because that’s what anti-gunners do—trade on tragedy, and use startling, horrendous murders to push their ineffective agenda.
Incidentally, the other two big pushes LWV made in its press release was to close the so-called “gun show loophole” and institute so-called “universal” background checks. First, there is no gun show loophole. The law at gun shows is just like anywhere else—licensed dealers selling guns there must perform the requisite background check just as if they were selling them in a shop. Additionally, there’s no evidence at this time that either gun was bought at a gun show or through private sales.
As for the “universal” background checks, the manner in which the two shooters got their guns is still being investigated. But anyone who believes that a law requiring a background check will deter those who have already decided to commit capital murder from obtaining a gun is as crazy as the folks at LWV, who apparently think that’s the case.
Read the full article here