At a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing, Rep. Jake Ellzey asked Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Director Steve Dettelbach a simple question: "In 15 seconds, would you define an 'assault weapon' for me?".
Dettelbach, who is supposed to be an expert in all things firearms and explosives, appeared before the subcommittee hearing on Tuesday.
"I'll go shorter than that, because honestly, if Congress wishes to take that up, I think Congress would have to do the work, but we would be there to provide technical assistance. I, unlike you, am not a firearms expert to the same extent as you maybe, but we have people at ATF who can talk about velocity of firearms, what damage different kinds of firearms cause, so that whatever determination you chose to make would be an informed one." Dettelbach answered.
Despite years of advocating for assault weapon bans, the head of the ATF has never provided a clear definition of what qualifies as an assault weapon.
We're supposed to believe that the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives has no earthly idea how to define "Assault weapons", despite the fact that his boss calls for them to be banned on a weekly basis and Democrats in states like Michigan, Colorado, and Washington are currently trying to prohibit their sale or possession? Gimme a break.
The truth is that "Assault weapon" has no real definition other than "Gun someone wants to ban." What's considered an "Assault weapon" in New York may not be an "Assault weapon" in Ilinois, while California lawmakers have gone back and redefined "Assault weapon" on multiple occasions since enacting its first ban back in 1989.
"Joe Biden's ATF Director just testified in a Congressional hearing that he's not a firearms expert. Wow. Maybe the ATF shouldn't be regulating your firearms then."
No comments:
Post a Comment