Their stance of utter resistance to any constraint, is defended on the basis of “slippery slope” arguments. They maintain that any legal restraint on gun ownership is inherently part of a plot to eventually eliminate all forms of gun ownership.
Now, lest anyone mistake me for a reflex lefty nannystater, let me avow that slippery slope arguments do have enough historical support to logically merit a proper place in any discussion. Firearm registration records in European countries, before World War Two, were later used by both Nazi and Communist tyrannies to strip the populace of registered weapons. This fact – recited ad nauseam – offers a core of justified fear that should be part of any reasoned discussion.
Elsewhere, I’ve tried to analyze the central fear of gun rights supporters… a crux worry that is deeply American and that (indeed) many liberals share. I tried to logically derive a solution that could satisfy any reasonable person… even one who wants to keep secret the kinds of weapons that would be most useful in a mass insurrection against some future Big Brother tyranny. See “The Jefferson Rifle.”
To be clear… right-wingers often repeat their mantra that “liberals want to take away our guns.” But they cannot point to any mainstream (non lefty-dingbat) democrat or liberal voices who have made any such moves, in decades. Indeed, most thinking people now know that the flood of guns and ammunition that has filled America is long past unstoppable. It has come in tsunami layerings that are by now almostsedementary, a layer so thck that future geologists will find fossils of glocks and colts in the very rocks! Firefighters are asking for bullet proof gear, before they go into some burning homes, so sure are they that the closets -full of ammo will go off.
Liberals aren’t pushing for gun control. Given the hot rhetoric of Culture War and violence pouring from men like Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh, more and more liberals are buying weapons of their own.
But no. Even so. A line has to be drawn somewhere. If only because the world will not follow a Pax Americana that has gone insane.
A good place to start is with those 31 round magazines. They are only good for one purpose, pouring a lot of bullets into a crowd of people, too fast for anyone to react. You cannot come up with another scenario for such awful things. Even if you are in a B-Movie gun fight with a horde of motorcycle-riding zombies, that will take place over a period when you can change your freaking magazines. Heck, Lady Lara Croft does just fine with seven or nine-round clips.
Time and again, we have seen mass murdering gunmen brought down by brave citizen bystanders… at Columbine and when Reagan and Ford and Robert Kennedy were attacked… and in Tucson. For the most part, the take-down happened as soon as the bastard ran out of bullets!
This is one case where the slippery slope is all the nutters have. There are no other justifications for allowing Big Clips. If you can fantacize ever needing one… fantacize being part of the next unarmed crowd.