We need to set better weapons limits
Many of us have strong opinions about gun control. And we frequently disagree with one another. Still, there are some things we can agree on.
For instance, we don’t let everybody have hand grenades, machine guns or nerve gas. The founding fathers had flintlock rifles and dueling pistols. Yes, they had cannons and grapeshot too, though very few early patriots kept heavy artillery or military arsenals in their homes. While the Supreme Court says we have the right to bear arms for personal protection, we limit the kinds of weapons people can own. No reasonable person considers this a violation of our constitutional rights.
The choices we face are not constitutional issues. We have weapons limits. Our task is to decide where to set those limits.
OK. I lied about machine guns. You and everybody else can buy a simple modification to an AR-15 rifle that enables it to shoot 100 rounds per minute. They even offer free shipping.
Don’t take my word for it. Google “AR-15 bump stock.” And brace yourself. The YouTube clips are astonishing.