A Modest Proposal: Democrats Want To Ban Anyone Under The Age Of 16 From Being Near AR-15 Rifles

With Democrats unable to sell their awful ideas on gun control policy, they’re becoming more and more irrational in their future proposals. Right now, there’s a piece of legislation that’s destined for legislative death, which would ban people under the age of 16 from firing AR-15 rifles ("weapons of war"), or any firearm considered to be “military-style” because that’s totally enforceable, said by no one ever (via The Hill):

The proposal—from Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.)—would ban people younger than 16 from having or firing a machine gun or assault weapon.

“The small hands of children and big power of machine guns are a deadly combination,” Markey said in a statement. “Assault weapons are weapons of war and should not be allowed in the hands of children."

The ban would include blocking kids from firing the guns at a gun show or a gun range.

The proposal has the support of outside groups, including the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. The children of Charlie Vacca, a firearms instructor who was accidentally killed in 2014 by a 9-year-old girl firing a machine gun, are also supporting the bill.

"We’re now calling upon kids across the nation and their parents support this brave bill by signing our petition. Kids and assault weapons don’t mix," they said in a statement.

Oh, where to begin with this Frankenstein monster. First, there’s no such thing as assault weapons, and labeling them weapons of war doesn’t make it scarier—or add a scintilla of clarity or truth to the matter. An AR-15 rifle at 21 feet, the typical range in a self-defense encounter, is just as deadly as a 9mm handgun. Any firearm is potentially a so-called weapon of war. A hunting rifle is a weapon of war. In fact, they actually use the ammunition that our soldiers used in World War II. The ubiquitous M1 Garand chambered a 30.06 round, which is commonly used for hunting.

The silly part about the semantics of this debate is that the constant changing of the language from assault weapon -- > to weapons of war just highlights that liberals are solely concerned with how the gun looks. They’re not at all interested in the facts about the weapons system since there’s no discernible difference (operating wise) between an AR-15 and a handgun. If they’re hoping to move the needle by calling it a different name to shock the public, they can save it. No one trusts Democrats when it comes to guns, and the public shouldn’t. They think that ghost guns exist, which can shoot “a .30-caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second. Thirty magazine clip in half a second.” Also, Sen. Markey doesn’t know that math and arithmetic is the same thing. I wouldn’t trust these clowns drafting legislation for running a lemonade stand (which would also be absurd) let alone dictate how we can exercise our Second Amendment rights. The only sobering fact is that this bill is sure to die, but it shows hat we must remain vigilant, as always, against the anti-gun Left.

Lastly, any responsible gun owner knows that a nine-year-old shouldn't be firing automatic weapons, let alone an Uzi, which is what happened in the Vacca case. It was an accident. Blessedly, such instances are rare, given that firearm-related accidents involving children under 14 has decreased 66 percent over the past two decades, a record low.