Sina-cism: When government misfires

Print More

As an opening salvo, let me make clear that I am not writing to change anyone’s mind about guns or gun ownership. I support the Second Amendment. I believe the right to keep and bear firearms is an individual right, as the Supreme Court affirmed in the landmark cases District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. Chicago (2010).

Chris Sinacola

Chris Sinacola

You may, or may not, agree. Thanks to the Second Amendment, we Americans are free to hold and express the opinions enumerated in the First Amendment.

But no one is free to violate the Constitution, due process and the rights of their fellow citizens. Yet that is exactly what Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey did on July 20, when she issued an interpretation of the state’s 1998 “assault weapons” ban.

I add the quotes because, while any weapon in the wrong hands can be deadly, there is no such thing as an assault weapon per se. Rather, there are politicians who seek to restrict weapons which they find distasteful or believe to be particularly dangerous. By creating labels and definitions, they are able to enact restrictions without violating the Second Amendment.

Attoney General Maura Healey

Antonio Caban / State House News Service

Attoney General Maura Healey


More Sina-cism: Save Our Sanity — anti-charter schools lies and distortion




Log in or subscribe to read the entire story. Only $2. No recurring charges.

One thought on “Sina-cism: When government misfires

  1. If I was hunting down a rabid animal that was attacking my livestock, having that much firepower (Bravo Compsny Mfg. modified AR-15) would make me feel a whole lot safer than a single shot rifle. However, thinking about a neighbor having this much firepower for “home defense” would leave me up nights – I don’t care how many hours may have been spent in class. In a close situation such as a house break-in (as well as a movie theatre, club, etc) a person with lots of hours logged in on the range should be able to handle the situation….but the Assault Rifle 15? Those bullets would tear through walls like they were paper. How far can those bullets travel? All the way to MY house? To the roadway? (As for a movie theatre or club, it would have to wait for ballistics to see who killed more people – the gunman or the “upstanding civilian”. There is a time and place for a multitude of weapons. An assault rifle is not an effective and safe weapon for home defense. I’m not a foaming at the mouth left winger or right winger. I just try to sort through things using common sense