I didn’t want to take time away from my research but I criticized Rubio for election sleeze, so I must back him up when he is wrongly decried for standing up.
In the CNN Sunrise, FL, Town Hall broadcast (2017.02.21), two politicians, Sen. Bill Nelson and Congressman Ted Deutch (both Democrats) sleezed over questions so slickly no one realized they were being slicked.
Here’s what Nelson and Deutch did. When asked whether they would support banning assault-style weapons, BOTH said “Yes” clarifying that there was a list of 200 or so specific assault weapons they would support banning.
Sound good? If so, you’ve been slicked. They were deliberately misleading you! I can clarify by example, contrasting insurance policies “Named Perils” v “All Risk”. With an “All Risk” policy, if the insurance company hasn’t listed an event as an exception then you’re covered. If a sinkhole opens under your house and swallows up your house, and sinkholes aren’t listed on the policy as an exception then you ARE covered. On the other hand, you must be careful about “Named Peril.” If you buy a “Named Peril” policy and sinkholes aren’t one of the named perils, then, in the event above, you’re NOT covered!
This is what politicians have been doing with assault weapons. Ban a “named list”. Now, if I manufacture assault rifles and my ARX-47 is on the list, then all I need to do is drill a hole in the stock “to make it lighter”, or cut a groove in the stock “for a more comfortable grip”, or any of an infinite number of meaningless changes just to change the model to, say, ARY-47 — which I can now sell since it isn’t on the banned list.
This seems to be what Sen. Rubio was trying to explain and why he shouldn’t support this “slick the voters” bill that would fool and placate naive and gullible voters that they were, indeed, supporting a bill banning assault weapons — a “slick” bill that doesn’t at all ban assault weapons but fools voters.
Sen. Nelson began by chronicling his boyhood hunting and correctly concluded that assault weapons were for killing, not hunting, I agreed completely. I, too, grew up hunting and carried concealed most of my adult life here in Israel, as do many Israelis (and, as a result, despite media hype, we and our children are vastly safer here than you are there). But then Sen. Nelson “slicked” the audience by stipulating that he supported a “named model” bill, which does NOT ban assault weapons, only a few, of thousands (as Rubio tried to point out) models. So, most of you were slicked, yet again, by politicians.
I have two questions of my own:
1. Why did no one note that it was Obama and Dims who did nothing after those past massacres?
2. I’m an Independent who asks: Why does no one stand up and correct these same Dims who did nothing the last 8 years when they insist that today’s Congress — which THEY belligerently gridlock on every important bill INCLUDING this one — that this is a Republican-controlled Congress and Senate. Gridlick is NOT control! Obstruction — namely Dims — produce gridlock. Today’s Congress and Senate is NOT Republican CONTROLLED, it is Dim-gridlocked!!!
There’s still another “slick” going on by liberals: insinuating that arming teachers is some kind of requirement. No one of any stature has in the remotest way suggested that any teacher would be required to handle a weapon. If you’re a teacher who doesn’t want to then simply don’t. No one has even remotely suggested making you do so. But don’t impose your reticence on other teachers who may make their choice to qualify and license themselves to protect their students instead of deliberately choosing to avoid that responsibility and potential opportunity to save students’ lives.
So hat’s off in this instance to Sen. Rubio for being a stand-up guy trying to get the slick out of this bill. I hope he holds to that standard.