If it’s a day ending in Y, it means that somewhere a Democrat seeking the power to make decisions for your life is demonstrating they should instead be kept as far away from your freedoms as possible.
Today’s example is Brianna Wu, the “progressive” software engineer of Gamergate fame running for a Michigan House seat in the 2020 elections.
Earlier this week, Wu tweeted about getting a chance to fire a fully-automatic M16 rifle, and how the experience strengthened her conviction that there’s “no reason for a civilian to have access to this weapon, or one like it” (hat tip to Conservative Tribune):
2/ For starters, growing up in the South, I took an NRA safety class as a teenager. I spent many an afternoon as a kid in target practice.
But this assault rifle is a different beast. It would take A MINIMUM of 30-40 hours of professional instruction to learn to operate safely.
— Brianna Wu (@BriannaWu) February 26, 2019
4/ These guns belong in the hands of soldiers who have been trained. They do not belong in the hands of civilians.
There is no reason someone would need this to defend their home.
— Brianna Wu (@BriannaWu) February 26, 2019
This is all very interesting, except for one small problem: she’s knocking down a straw-man. It’s already illegal for civilians to own fully-automatic weapons manufactured after 1986, and even purchasing older weapons is expensive and highly regulated. And there’s not exactly a serious effort going on to change that anytime soon.
Two of Twitter’s best and brightest conservatives didn’t let Wu get away with it:
Uh, are you aware these are already not legal to possess by a civilian citizen? Are you aware of the distinction between automatic and semi-automatic? https://t.co/JRPseYKI1H
— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) February 28, 2019
The rifle you’re discussing in this thread is full auto and is already virtually banned. It is dishonest of you to present them as if they’re widely available and easily accessed. https://t.co/yvDRhJbbsD
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) February 28, 2019
So, is Wu ignorant or lying? Well, it doesn’t help her case that her “response” to the pushback was to cry “death threats” and lamely claim that her point stands because M16s are sorta kinda like semi-automatic weapons such as the AR-15.
1/ I delete Tweets when they are inaccurate or are poorly worded. I’m not deleting this one, even though the gun fanatics are having a field day, and are sending death threats.
Everything I said here is true.
We MUST address gun violence with a broad assault weapons ban. https://t.co/C9EY7dfKLa
— Brianna Wu (@BriannaWu) February 28, 2019
3/ The overwhelming number of Americans want reasonable gun laws. Instant background checks. Assault weapons ban. Mandatory gun locks.
I’m going to stand for these reasonable policies. And I will not be intimidated by gun fanatics.
— Brianna Wu (@BriannaWu) February 28, 2019
In other words, Wu’s experience didn’t actually give her any valuable new insight into the gun debate; it was just a lazy hook to segue into a generic gun-control screed with only a tenuous connection.
No, there’s “no purpose” to owning such weapons….unless you count, just off the top of my head, Stephen Willeford, the man who used his AR-15 to stop the perpetrator of the 2017 Texas church shooting.
“If I had run out of the house with a pistol and faced a bulletproof vest and kevlar and helmets, it might have been futile,” he said at the time. “I ran out with an AR-15 and that’s what he was shooting the place up with.”
Fortunately for Brianna Wu, facts don’t matter when you’re running as a Democrat; moral indignation reigns supreme.
Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.