Tracing only shows who initially bought the firearm, it does not solve crimes.
That was definitely a liberal hit piece on gun ownership. Equating gun ownership to reckless criminal behavior is a very biased opinion. We were able to climb out of a sewer of criminal activity simply because honest people were able to fight back. It constantly amazes me how the left jumps to the worst possible conclusions to support their arguments.
Just a minute, I need to step out and rinse the B.S. off my boots.
Once gone, the rule of law is painfully hard to resurrect or institute. Consider the many countries that are mired in corruption, gripped by organized crime, suffering constant public violence or in the midst of civil war. Life becomes nearly impossible there, and it is hard to climb out of this mess when law is not respected. By recklessly empowering gun owners, our legislators undermine rule of law, pushing us into the ranks of lawless nations.
Ruling for the 2A makes me a corrupted organized criminal that is going out and committing fits of public violence? The 2A pushes us into the ranks of a lawless nation?
I suspect the writer doesn’t understand the words actually matter. When he writes an article like this most folks outside of his narrow ideology just shake their collective heads and say B.S.
This sounds like one of the main reasons the 2A was written in the first place. Both to help prevent these situations from occurring and to protect ourselves and our families if they do.
And I really don’t get what The Truth About Guns is up to.
Most of their articles are pro 2A but they keep throwing in these completely nonsensical anti self defense articles on a regular basis.
Are they trying to show they are balanced by throwing in these illogical counter arguments? Or are all the pro 2A articles just to suck in firearm owners so they can try to change our minds by tricking us into reading this nonsense in hopes of nudging us towards the anti self defense crowd?
I don’t get that sense from them. I think they are merely keeping us up to date on what the leftists are saying. It is important for us to know these things. I don’t often read leftist crap. It upsets me to much. I think TTAG is just keeping us aware.
That makes two of us brother
I normally avoid reading leftist blather but I read this one, expecting some sort of rebuttal or some alternative view, given the website it was posted on.
So having wasted 5 minutes of my life on it, I have one comment. He states that a “common use” of “assault rifles” is committing mass shootings. I wish I knew what an assault rifle was. Honestly, I don’t know what attributes turn any ordinary rifle into an assault one, but that aside, lets take the lowly and maligned Armalite style rifle and call it an “assault rifle.” Quick Google searching indicates there are over 25,000,000 of them in private US hands today. Another quick google search found a Newsweek article that indicated that AR15’s were used to kill 36 people in mass shootings in 2022.
So, to that idiot, 0.144% (14 one hundredths of one percent) is “common”. What an a$$hole.
don’t shoot the messenger, I just seen and posted the article.
Pure fabrication to justify an unfounded argument.
Don’t have anything against the messenger:) Just trying to figure out TTAG’s message.
@Virgil_H ‘s theory probably makes the most sense especially since their anti 2A stories are often so completely unhinged. It is just strange that they are put forward exactly the same way as their much more reasoned pro 2A articles. I already know the anti self defense crowds reasoning is fatally flawed. I’d rather not waste my time reading their extremist ramblings. I can get enough of that in the mainstream media.
While I’m on the whole “assault rifle” crap, I even remember years ago under some prior assault rifle ban that my little vintage Savage 22 LR target rifle qualified as an “assault rifle.” I don’t remember which of it’s characteristics earned it that title, but I do know that in the 35 years that I’ve owned it, it has never once jumped off the gun rack and assaulted anyone. It’s been very well behaved all these years, only putting holes exactly where I told it to in distant sheets of paper.
I’ve been more assaulted and injured by my cats than I ever have been by a gun!
Ban the assault cats!
The sad thing is if you told a couple of the anti self defense folks that there was a firearm called the Assault Cat they would call their representatives insisting it be added to the banned assault weapons list and the representatives would add it to the list without even checking to see that it didn’t actually exist.
I guess I should have put joking behind my message
So I want to know, what are you so afraid of, so intimidated by that instead of calling law enforcement for protection of you and your family, you need an Assault Cat? 
Assault rifle is defined in the NFA as a rifle that has selectable fire from semiautomatic to automatic or burst.
Assault weapons, on the other hand, are semiautomatic rifles that have a laundry list of other features such as detachable magazines, or any magazine over a 10 round capacity, a threaded barrel, a pistol grip or fore grip or folding or telescope stock or other scary looking thing on them.
Assault rifles have been regulated since the NFA was passed.
The term assault was was applied to rifles to make it seem dangerous to people who have no understanding of firearms. Rifles such as the AR-15 were labeled assault rifles by legislators and gun control advocates. It all depends on who is holding the rifle, in the hands of someone like myself the term defensive rifle can justifiably be applied.