@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:You clearly cannot read.
I read just fine. You repeatedly expressed support for laws that forbid pistol grips on semi-auto rifles.
MontereyJack wrote:Neither of my posts that you cite even mentions pistol grips,
Even if that had been true, you still clearly expressed support for laws against pistol grips.
But as it happens, you said this:
"weapons with ONE functional feature (which oralloy mistakenly refers to as "cosmetic features") will be banned"
So you did in fact mention pistol grips.
You were wrong of course to refer to pistol grips as a functional feature. But you did in fact refer to them.
MontereyJack wrote:Further I would certainly never accuse you of pulling a blatham,
You just did accuse me of pulling a blatham.
MontereyJack wrote:since he talks sense and you conspicuously do not.
It never fails that people who either support fascism or oppose civil liberties will invoke common sense.
MontereyJack wrote:Further, on the basis of the quarter century that has passed since the assault style weapons ban, and the continuing increased evidence of the deadly use of semi auto guns, including the videos of test firings I have posted several times, I now call for a NZ style ban on semi auto weapons with detachable magazines, since they are capable of firing a hundred aimed shots in about a minute and a half, which goes far beyond self defense and puts us firmly in the realm of slaughter. Kindly update your tIrades.
Does this mean you renounce your earlier calls to outlaw pistol grips?
Even if you personally renounce it, do realize that you do not speak for all progressives, who for the most part remain eager to violate people's civil liberties for their own sadistic pleasure.