Definitely Not Getting It

I’ve come to expect garbage from the Philadelphia Inquirer who’s never looked at replacing the wood furniture on a domestically assembled firearm made from some foreign parts, and having to figure out whether doing so will up the foreign part count to a sufficient quantity as to run afoul of Title 18 Section 922 Subsection (r) of the United States Code, causing your domestically assembled firearm to suddenly morph into an evil imported assault weapon.

Anyone who thinks gun laws are only about fighting crime, and can’t innocently trap honest gun owners, doesn’t have nearly enough experience with them.

SayUncle has more.

6 thoughts on “Definitely Not Getting It”

  1. Yeah, most gun-banners don’t know about the laws that exist, just the laws they want to exist.

    In a sense, they are right about “one gun a month” or a long waiting periods not really affecting most gun owners. I know I can’t buy more than one a month, regardless of the law (…wife’s law supersedes state law.) But… these laws don’t do one darn thing stop crime either. Why bother passing a law that doesn’t help, but it does actually negatively affect some people (even if they are in the minority)?

  2. Seriously, there’s no way for free trade agreements to affect importation rules?

  3. Not really. Another country could make the case that it’s a non-tariff barrier, but who’s going to do that? The international consensus is generally that guns in the hands of people who are not in service of a government is a dangerous and undesirable thing.

Comments are closed.