It seems every time a heinous crime is committed by a criminal with a gun, the Democrats want to help criminals by taking rights of law-abiding citizens to possess the same type of weapon used, ultimately giving criminals an advantage over good citizens. For politicians to dance in the blood of innocent victims gunned down by criminals in an effort to fulfill their agendas of infringing on rights is a heinous crime in itself. Some say no one needs an AR-15, yet many law enforcement officers disagree as they have to face many weapons in serving their communities. Why should law-abiding citizens be put at any more of a disadvantage when in the service of protecting their families?
If AR-15s are successfully banned and criminals just use semiautomatic handguns with high-capacity magazines, will Democrats then move to ban those handguns? If you ask many Democrats, they already want those handguns included. Several Democrats want a federal mandate that bans any magazine over 10 rounds and one Democrat was already successful in her state of California. That Democrat was Dianne Feinstein who has had a Concealed Carry Permit and has carried a pistol holding 16 rounds. I guess what is good for the queen is not always good for her subjects.
In an interview, Feinstein was once asked about banning guns and replied, “If I had the votes, Mr. and Mrs. America would have to turn them all in.” Apparently she forgot about that interview because in a later interview she was asked, “Do conservatives have any justification for their concerns of gun bans?” Her reply? “It simply isn’t true. It’s not what I’ve done in the past and not what I’m doing right now.” Politicians who attempt to disarm law abiding citizens aid and abet criminals with guns.