Via Fox News
A former police officer made a bold proclamation during a congressional hearing Wednesday regarding a proposed assault-weapons ban: she would not comply.
Dianna Muller, who served in the Tulsa Police Department for 22 years and is the founder of gun advocacy group The DC Project, was among the witnesses at the House Judiciary Committee hearing. The session on an otherwise contentious issue flew largely under the radar amid the Trump-Ukraine controversy and Democrats’ impeachment push. But reflecting the gun control divide in the country — amid a spate of deadly mass shootings that prompted renewed calls for strict laws — Muller said that such a ban would force lawful gun owners to either give up their arms or become criminals.
“Please don’t legislate the 150 million people just like me into being criminals. It has happened. You’ve already done it,” Muller said, referring to the Trump administration’s ban on bump stocks, the devices that use a semi-automatic weapon’s recoil to make it rapidly fire like an automatic. “I was a bump stock owner, and I had to make a decision: do I become a felon, or do I comply?”
Should the government pass an assault-weapons ban, Muller declared, “I will not comply.”
Muller and others at the hearing focused on the practicality of a ban, pointing out what they claimed were mainly “cosmetic” differences between weapons such as the AR-15 and standard semi-automatic hunting rifles. This issue was also raised by Heritage Foundation senior legal policy analyst Amy Swearer when Rep.Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., went down the line of witnesses asking if they believed hunting rifles should be banned if they are semi-automatic.
Swearer said no, stating that there was no difference in the mechanics or function of an “assault weapon” or a semi-automatic hunting rifle.
……”As I read the Second Amendment, it doesn’t say the right to bear arms shall not be infringed unless the gun has scary features,” Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said.
I own a firearm. I support the United States Constitution. I support the right to defend myself, my family, and my home from thugs who would rather steal than earn like the rest of working Americans.
I will not forfeit my freedom or my life for the sake of ‘gun control’. When seconds count, the cops are only minutes away and I don’t have the Dem politicians security system of body guards.
In 1981, author Chip Elliott wrote a pointed response to the anti-gun demagogues. He came full circle from being a member of the anti-gun camp, to a gun rights advocate after he got cold-cocked by reality. Read the whole thing. It’s a classic essay.
New York City and Obama’s Chicago home have some of the nation’s highest gun-related crime rates, in spite of passing some of the strictest gun laws in the country.
Bottom line: Armed criminals deliberately choose soft, unarmed targets. They couldn’t give one shit less about the idea of restrictive gun laws. Every law-abiding American citizen has the right to defend themselves.
I will not be disarmed.
Same here. If gun legislation moves me to the criminal side of the law then so be it. Liberal shit monkeys and their followers will never have my guns and certainly should never try to forcefully take them. On the doorstep of going too far, these gun fearing assholes will find millions of honest citizens won’t stand for being bullied by whimpering simps that think a hug and a round of Kumbaya will make the bad people go away.
If/when “The Man” comes for my gun(s), I will give it(them) to him — bullets first; saving the brass for reloading.