Goal of the left to disarm the poor?

[rocket88]

Really, you'd expect them to openly say it? Oh how naive...



Who are "you guys"? I happen to enjoy collecting and shooting, of course when politicians try to increase the costs 10 fold I would take issue.

You see, I oppose bad or pointless laws based on poor reasoning that will not accomplish its stated goal.

I also oppose pointless laws that will not accomplish the goal. That's why I oppose voter ID.

 

[iliveonramen]

And they call gun nuts or 2nd amendment "enthusiast" crazy!

 

[CalGun]

$50 isn't a stretch. Just go to the next govt gun grab (I mean gun buy back program) with a sign offering $40 cash for working guns - you will get takers!

But your post is right, in fact its been stated in gun control advocacy that since they can't change the gun culture of America in one generation they'll gladly take 2, 3 or 4 generations to do so. One of the means is making firearms more expensive. Its hard to "fight" 80 million gun owners. Add a $100 to the cost of gun ownership and it will probably drop to 50 million gun owners within a few years. Tack on another $250 and they can get the gun ownership population down to 30 million (10%) and then they can defeat them at the polls.

Often on this forum, anti-gunners - nearly all of which who are partisan Democrats - state they want fees and taxes to eliminate "cheap guns." The undercurrent of legislation - particularly requiring background checks on private gun sales - always adds fees to the price of a gun. For background checks, it is the dealer's fee ($20 to $50) and also a federal background check fee is also wanted.

IF a person is wealthy, they can pay the government fees to have a machine gun and even belt fed machine guns. Or 20mm cannons. As many as they want. The rich can buy fighter jet aircraft ( Russian military aircraft on sale for general public ) and my wife even met a super rich fellow who bought himself a new F16 as his hotrod aircraft. While it does not have missiles, imagine a super rich person going suicidally nuts and flying one of that at super sonic speeds into a school, football game or government facility. And he certainly could mount his legal (that he can afford) fully automatic 50 caliber machine guns on one of those too. If he went crazy, he could kill thousands before stopped. BUT the concern is only about ordinary people and particularly poor people.

In the past, anyone could buy a new but cheap handgun for under $50. Those days are long gone due to federal standards for firearms. And the drive now is to make any firearm cost at least hundreds of dollars for the cheapest.

It's called disarming the poor. And a desire to imprison the poor who don't agree to be defenseless. The ONLY way around this for the poor will to buy cheap, used firearms "black market" - thus sending the poor to a federal prison for years, lost of voting rights and - of course BANNED FOR LIFE FROM HAVING A FIREARM - for the major FEDERAL FELONY of buying a black market .25 caliber cheap pistol for $100 - where a rich person could buy a dozen 9mm over double the capacity Glocks entirely legally.

Is economic bigotry the new mantra of the left? Is the known effect being disarming the poor by making firearms too expensive via fees and regulations for the poor and low-income folks also the goal of the anti-gun left? And to imprison the poor who make the terrible mistake of attempting to have the same self defense rights as the rich liberal anti-gunners demanding the poor be disarmed?