New York Times argues for gun confiscation in Page One editorial December 4, 2015 by Twitchy Staff
Not all guns, however. Just the ones the NYT editors can’t really describe, but think are too deadly:
It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.
Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.
What better time than during a presidential election to show, at long last, that our nation has retained its sense of decency?
What’s strange is the “gun epidemic” is largely over in New York City. Why not advocate for the same policing and sentencing strategies that worked there to be implemented nationally rather than this unconstitutional move that’s sure to fail?
No comments:
Post a Comment