VIDEO: Vietnam vet, hunter, gun owner supports assault weapon ban. "I know these guns. I know what they can do."

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

gun industry supports mitch mcconnell ad 

BoldProgressives has a new ad featuring a Kentucky hunter holding Mitch McConnell accountable on guns:

Help air this TV ad in Kentucky. Click here: https://secure.actblue.com/contribute...

Join the fight: http://GunOwnersForReform.com

Join over 20,000 gun owners (including the guy in this TV ad) and over 100,000 other Americans who signed the petition supporting President Obama's bold gun plan: criminal background checks, ban assault weapons, ban high-capacity magazines. http://GunOwnersForReform.com

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) has over 950,000 members who believe in fighting for bold progressive change. Together, we fight for our values. Learn about us here:
http://BoldProgressives.org/
http://www.facebook.com/boldprogressives
http://twitter.com/boldprogressive

TV Ad Credit: CD² Productions for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee

Here's what one commenter said under that YouTube:

ALonelyImmigrant:

That does not answer my question in the least; if these weapons are supposedly only good for killing cops and children then why do we entrust the local police department with them? They have strength in numbers and I believe that a Glock 23 with ten round magazines would serve them all just fine -- they don't NEED these "assault weapons".

Those who are hired to protect us against mass murderers with assault weapons who massacre entire groups of people need to subdue, catch, and overwhelm the enemy. Look how much man power, weaponry, and equipment it took to corner just one man, Christopher Dorner. And what about criminals who intend to use bombs? Unfortunately, in order to do their job, police officers need to be have more fire power on their side than the "bad guys" do on theirs. 

If criminals used shotguns only, local police would still need to outgun them.

It's regrettable that anyone needs a gun or rifle to shoot another person in the first place, but since the Constitution allows it, there will be violent crimes that sometimes require equally violent responses.

gun industry supports mitch mcconnell ad 2

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare
  • http://twitter.com/RockMollica Rock Mollica

    The GOP thinks Gun Rights supersede the Right to Life and cares not about the massacre of 5 year olds. This Vet is absolutely correct Assault Weapons, although only .223 will go through 1/4" Steel and shatter a cement block. There is no use for them except for war. If you think that you can stand up to the full might and power of the United States, want Civil War, think about Waco. Our military can take you out at 1 1/2 miles and you will never hear the shot. The 2nd Amendment was written when it was Musket against Musket, and no longer makes sense. You can't go against drones, smart bombs, stealth or US Navy Seals with your Bushmaster. Saddam thought he would give us the "Mother of All Battles" and he had Russian top of the line Tanks. How did that work out for him.

  • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker

    Many years ago when I used to hunt deer, elk or moose, we used to say with pride; 'It only takes one shot' as a sign of our skill, hunting ethics for a clean kill and commitment to not wound or maim.  
    The gun nuts in today's assault weapons debate are not hunters in my opinion and know nothing of these ethics or hunting skills passed down from father to son. There is just no need for weapons of war to be in general circulation amongst the public as this video clearly says.
    Note: Long after I retired from hunting, a young nephew revised our saying after having shot a large bull elk in an isolated valley over a heavily wooded ridge to: 'It only takes one shot..... to get you seven long hours of hard slugging.'   ;-)