Tragedy always attracts a parade of progressive mountebanks, anxious to peddle their faulty wares as cures for what ails us, and US Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D- Utopia) is no different. In response to the heinous criminal acts perpetrated in Newtown, Connecticut she observed that…
“We need a comprehensive approach that includes improving access to mental health services, better enforcement of our current laws, and we need to get deadly assault weapons off our streets.”
Whatever you do, do not ask Senator Shaheen to describe an ‘Assault weapon’ because I am reasonably certain her talking points palm card did not include that.
The term “Assault weapon” is a lot like the term ‘Social Justice.’ It gets tossed around all the time, flowing seamlessly and with conviction from the mouths of progressives. And utopia looks damn good through those talking points glasses as long as you don’t ask them to define “Social Justice” or “Assault Weapons” for you.
If Webster were to transcribe what follows, directly into the pages of the dictionary, there would be more than a few ‘uh’ ‘um’ ‘like’ ‘err’s’ cluttering up the column inches. And that’s the way the agenda-driven flying narrative monkeys like it. It’s all about feelings. “I’ll know love when I find it” is a lot like “I’ll know an assault weapon when I hear it,” or more accurately–what they really mean is that they’ll ban as many as they can until they can ban more. That’s just how they roll.
So when “No-Maching-Gun” Jeanne Shaheen says get deadly assault weapons off the streets, we know that what she is really after is all the guns because lets be honest…a criminal with any weapon who is engaging in assault is using an assault weapon, and when a deranged coward enters an elementary school intent on killing, almost any firearm will do the job if they are deranged enough and no one is permitted access to equal or greater force in defense of themselves or others.
Jeanne Shaheen can phrase it however she wants but what she wants is to ban guns. We know she does, even coming from New Hampshire, because she is all-in on every other left wing, ding-bat, tin-foil-hat idea the left has ever come up with (except corn-ethanol but that is only because she wants to redirect that subsidy-infused-political-power into Jeanne-Shaheen-Shazam-Isis-Power-Hour” BAM! look at all the federal money I got Y’all for wood-chip ethanol” subsidies instead) so we know she wants to get all the guns off the streets.
Who cares if these guns (used in Newtown) did not come from “the streets” (another clue about what Jeanne really wants). And ‘assault weapons,’ like social justice, (or ‘streets) means whatever it needs to mean to accomplish whatever goal it is the speaker intends.
Here’s another not so secret truth. A murderous lunatic, who wants to kill and is willing to steal firearms, can and will steal almost any firearm. And they will then use that force advantage in a place where they are least likely to meet resistance. You don’t need the word ‘assault’ to ruin the lives of families when the object of your rage is an elementary school. Or a unarmed university campus. One with a sign.
Yes, Liberals put up signs. They advertise. Hey–no guns allowed, which means people who abide by the law will not enter the area armed. Murders, mass murders in particular, are not always as inclined to follow the law to begin with and hey, thanks for advertising the best places to exercise a lethal force advantage of legislated proportion.
So unless your goal is to disarm everyone, leaving the murderous lunatics with the overwhelming force advantage everywhere, and anywhere they choose to exercise it, with whatever weapons they can find–because law breakers don’t give a damn what you ban or why–nothing you say is either honest or beneficial to the society you claim to steward. Such is the mystery that is Jeanne Shaheen, US Senator from New Hampshire.
New Hampshire. Yes let’s talk about that for a moment.
New Hampshire is consistently one of the safest states in the nation. We have a great quality of life, low crime, low poverty, very healthy citizens, and a large number of them are walking around armed with what Jeanne Shaheen might call assault weapons. Concealed “assault weapons.” And that is why we are consistently one of the safest places to live in the nation. At any given moment there may be one or dozens of law abiding citizens who are armed, trained, and prepared to defend life and property, even when it is not their own.
Despite that Jeanne Shaheen would like to use the power of the police state to limit self-defense everywhere her bony progressive hands can reach. So it behooves us to inquire on such matters now that she has told us her intentions. So ask the Senator, “what do you mean by assault weapons?”
“What firearms would not be covered by your restriction, and therefore be deemed–by you–as more suitable for the public to defend themselves?” (As an aside: Should this class of weapons from this day forward be referred to sub-shaheen guns?)
Or if you prefer… “Do you think law abiding citizens should be able to defend themselves with firearms at all, and if yes, which ones?”
“If someone broke in and stole those ‘Senator Shaheen Approved’ weapons (the sub-shaheen Guns), then used them to commit a murder or mass murder, how would that reflect on your position, or your qualifications to make such judgements? Would the next step be to ban sub-shaheen guns as well?”
And there are plenty more questions we could or should ask but I’ll end with this: ‘After you’ve disarmed us, if someone should happen to walk into a room and start illegally discharging an approved or unapproved fire-arm at the people there, what would you suggest we do before or until we are shot or killed?”