fistful, it was always the intention of Josh Sugarman et al to blur the distinction between full-auto and semi-auto.
By conceding that point, we validate Sugarman's argument that pistol grips are only meant to facilitate mowing people down indiscriminately.
Since probably 90%+ of the population doesn't even know that ownership of full-auto's is legal under controlled circumstances, the majority will side with Sugarman. If for no other reason than it's just too hard to think about these issues when there are more pressing issues, such as the price of gasoline or the shortage of Beanie Babies during the Christmas shopping season.
Sugarman, Brady, Schumer and the rest owe their very existance to the ignorance of the American people on gun issues. We can't just hand them the "pistol grip" point and expect to walk away unscathed.
Everything they say is a lie. Everything. Pistol grips don't make it easier to kill, nor do bayonet lugs, barrel shrouds, folding stocks, collapsibile stocks, or detachable magazines.
Nor do waiting periods, gun-buyback programs, ammo bans, background checks, bans on this gun or that gun, or bans on full-auto's or short-barrelled shotguns make killing any more difficult.
How many studies have the Fed's conducted on the effectiveness of gun-control laws? We had one commissioned by the Carter administration in the 1970's, studying the enactment of the Gun Control Act of 1968. Results? Inconclusive. Decision? Shelve it.
We had the Justice Department in 1994 commission a study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics on the defensive use of firearms. Results? 1.5 million defensive uses versus 400,000 criminal uses of firearms. Decision? Bury it.
We had the BATF do a study in 1997 to track the gun-buying behavior of criminals following the enactment of the Brady Law. Results? Criminal purchases of firearms rose 16%, through illegal sources. Did anybody read that on the front page of the New York Times?
We just had the Centers for Disease Control--not exactly a neutral party in the gun debate--conclude a study of 51 studies of gun control laws. A study of studies...makes my taxpayer wallet get all warm and fuzzy.
At any rate, the CDC found their results of the study of the studies "inconclusive," and recommended more studies of yet more studies.
In other words, they didn't get the results they wanted, and want more money to spend until they can skew the results the way they want them.
There isn't one single gun control law that works, except to make it more difficult for the law-abiding to obtain guns for their lawful purposes.
Don't give anything to the anti's, whether it's pistol grips, bayo lugs, or even full-auto's.
The anti's have been on the run for at least five years, after torturing us for nearly 25 years. Now is not the time to offer concessions.