Jerry Nadler’s Lesson on Guns Goes All Kinds of Wrong – Opinion

On Wednesday, Rep. Jerry Nadler led the House hearing on guns. He is perhaps most well-known for his appearance in 2020 to defecate in public. RedState reports that David Hogg was there during the Parkland shooting and interrupted proceedings. He was escorted from the room.

But it was what was actually said by the congressional members that interested me the most, and you’ll be less than shocked to learn that abject ignorance was on display. Nadler provided a lesson in the history of M1 Garand which should have disqualified him from voting for any bills relating to guns.

There aren’t enough facepalm memes in existence to represent how objectively idiotic that comment is. M1 Garand chambered in the.30-06 rifle round, which is one of most powerful in existence. No, it’s not a .50 cal, but what else is? Comparable to an AR-15’s.223 bullet, the.3006 packs far more power and mass than that shot from an AR-15. I wouldn’t want to get shot by any bullet, but I dang sure wouldn’t want to be shot by a .30-06. There’s a reason it and the .300 Winchester are commonly used as big-game rounds.

Nadler didn’t stop there, though. Nadler then revealed to the world that Democrats actively seek legislation that is contrary the Constitution.

You are more familiar with Heller decision, you’ll be aware that the test put forth by now-deceased Justice Scalia is that the Constitution protects guns that are in “common use.” He came to that conclusion by supposing that at the time of the writing of the Second Amendment, the Founders clearly intended for common weapons such as muskets to be owned and kept by Americans.

Personally, I thought Scalia’s argument was arbitrary and didn’t go nearly far enough in protecting the true intention of the Second Amendment, which was to allow citizens to possess weapons of war in order to wage war (including things like cannons). Still, there’s no doubt that an AR-15, the most common sporting rifle in the country, is in “common use,” meeting the standard put forth by Heller. This means any federal attempt to ban them is unconstitutional. Nadler is apparently too stupid to realize that he’s providing the basis by which any law he passes would be overturned.

Nadler might have been outdone by another Democrat in the same hearing. David Cicilline, the Representative of New York City, spoke out about pistol braces. He claimed that they make bump stocks into automatic guns and can be used to create them.

Rep. Thomas Massie just demolishes the claim in the video, but for those who can’t watch it, a pistol brace is in no way a bump stock. It’s a piece of plastic that attaches to a person’s wrist and is commonly used with pistols, including AR pistols. It is a crucial tool that disabled vets and people with disabilities can use to accurately and safely operate their guns. A pistol brace does not make a gun more lethal (in fact, a regular stock is preferable for performance), and it certainly doesn’t make an AR-15 into an automatic weapon.

Democrats have no idea what guns are. These people don’t know what they’re talking about and should never be allowed to write regulations pertaining to firearms.

About Post Author

Follow Us