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:
TV Ad Credit: CD² Productions for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee
Here's what one commenter said under that YouTube:
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.