Patch

The .50 Caliber Rifle
This is what the gun nuts have to say about gun control, and the banning of the .50 caliber rifle and terrorism scenarios.
Let's look a little closer at these scenarios shall we and use a gun-banner's twisted logic. Two of them involve a van. The first--terrorists drive a van containing a nuclear weapon into a city and detonate it. The second--terrorists use a van to spray aerosol anthrax in a city. So let's ban vans. In another, terrorists use a small plane to spray blister or other agents over a stadium. So, let's ban small planes. Other scenarios--terrorists could release sarin gas into office buildings' ventilation systems. So let's ban ventilation systems. Terrorists could launch cyber attacks on America's financial infrastructure resulting in no deaths but causing a large economic impact. So let's ban computers.
Talk about twisted logic, outlaw vans? This is the problem gun nuts and conservatives have, they make any attempt to bring about somekind of gun control seem on the one hand stupid (like ban vans) and on the other hand simple (arm yourself).Nuclear weapons are banned, biological weapons are banned, chemical weapons are banned. One cannot walk into your neighborhood weapons of mass destruction store and buy nuclear bombs, anthrax, or sarin gas. Owning a van has nothing to do with anything. So the question is, should you be able to walk into your neighborhood sporting goods stores and buy military type weapons?
There is no one advocating outlawing planes, trains or automobiles. But there are plenty of people advocating the ownership of military weapons.
The Patch says this, read the 2nd amendment of the Constitution and argue about it until your blue in the face, but do we really have the right to own something like this .50 caliber rifle?
And don’t give the Patch this BS about gun registration. Every state that passed conceal carry laws, people lined up by the thousands to register.
The Patch