Via Jeff Soyer, we have one of the early victims. A competitive pistol shooter who police refuse to renew a gun license for. I’m trying to think of a jurisdiction that enacted licensing, that didn’t then tighten the wrench on the requirement until they got to the point where bans or de facto bans were feasible. We saw it happen in New York City, we saw it happen in the United Kingdom, in New Zealand, in Finland, Canada, Massachusetts, and several others.
But you know, we’re just unreasonable and paranoid for not agreeing to the eminently reasonable step of licensing gun owners.
Gotta show their new EU leaders what good
SSpolice officers they are.It happened in DC and Chicago as well. First register your pistols, then don’t allow new registrations. No slipperly slope there!
Kind of puts a damper on his next round of scores without a pistol, huh?
Guns are symbolic of self reliance and independence, that’s why people who are in positions of power, hate them so much. The modern Public Official (PO) believes everyone below him needs to be taken care of, kept from harming himself or others, by someone who is more intelligent and powerful. This would be the Public Official himself. He KNOWS he is smarter because of his station above the masses, and more powerful because of his position in government. He believes his mission is to “take care” of “his people”. Self reliant, independent people take care of themselves and are prickly about government meddling. Therefore, they are a threat to the PO’s power and must be taken down. Making and promoting laws that remove weapons (guns) from the masses is the PO’s way of gaining more power for the government and thereby, himself. However, the PO can’t just come right out and say this, so he disguises it as gun control to “make things safer” but the result is the same… no guns for the masses, more power for the POs. First guns, then the Internet.