Whether you watch The View or want to shoot your TV when it comes on, this video illustrates a bigger problem: the talking heads of gun control are incredibly uniformed on both sides of the argument.
Whoppi argues, “Automatic weapons, they’re not for hunting. They do nothing — they’re only there to kill. And you’ll notice that a lot of things that happened are with automatic weapons. When we see that why don’t we say, ‘Who really needs to have one other than people that are at war?’”
Rand Paul replies, “Truly automatic weapons we don’t have. We banned truly automatic weapons in I think 1934.”
What follows is the same argument between pro and anti gun lobbies we’ve all heard for decades. They’re almost reading from a script, but Paul is on the wrong page. He tries to discuss the difference between semi-auto and full auto, but he does it with the claim that full auto weapons don’t exist anymore. Instead of trying to placate anti-gunners with a lie that will just blow up in his face, he should have jumped right to his concluding statement: “The other problem is if we take ownership away of specific types of guns, you really have to modify — something that big has to be either legislation or possibly a Constitutional amendment.”
The situation is more complicated than they would like it to be. Yes, full auto weapons exist. No, they are not available to everyone.
It’s great that he’s making an argument in favor of the 2nd amendment, but he should probably know what a tax stamp is.