Reid Admits No Support For "Assault Weapons" Ban

[Bricker]

@RTFirefly

You know, if that message had just started circulating during the run-up to the 2012 election as a justification for voting for Dems in that election, you might have a point.

But given that that message had been circulating for a dozen years prior to Sandy Hook, the fact is that that message was correct for almost all of that time.

And then a massacre even more horrific than the usual run of mass murders happened, and that message was superseded by events.

(What? It didn’t remain accurate until the heat death of the universe? Hypocrites!! :D)

You know, Bricker, your obtuseness is really something impressive to behold.

in my view, these events prove that the message was never accurate.

In other words, even a mass murder this horrible is only one event, and not a proper basis for setting policy. Anecdotes are not data – one horrible murder using an AR-15 does not justify banning AR-15s in the absence of more generalized data indicating the harm they cause. So what this set of events suggest is that Democrats were always predisposed to enact various bans, and stymied only by the lack of more general public support.

But again: irrelevant to my point. Let’s pretend you’re right. My question remains: having now seen the ease with which Democrats were persuaded to abandon their previous disavowal of interest in gun restrictions, can they, going forward, again claim a lack of interest in gun control?