Democrat Pol Says It Is Not Sporting to Use a Semiautomatic Weapon for Self-Defense

In case you didn’t get the memo that Democrat politicians have for some time now been on the side of the bad guys, Pennsylvania congressional candidate Dan Muroff can bring you up to date with a recent diatribe against law-abiding citizens’ fundamental right of self-defense, which includes this gem:

It’s not sporting to use a semi-automatic weapon to go hunting, or frankly, self-defense.

Muroff also raved,

Guns in the street are easier to find than healthy produce. … They unravel the fabric of not just an individual’s future, but with it their family’s future.

Imagine a mother and her children happen to be alone in the house when a gang of underprivileged persons breaks in to rape and pillage, and thanks to Democrats she has no modern weapon. That might unravel a family’s future. But at least it wouldn’t be unsporting.

Downtrend gasps,

WTF!?! It’s not sporting to defend yourself using a semi-automatic weapon against a dangerous criminal? Does he honestly feel like we need to give the scumbags a sporting chance when they are trying to rape and murder? I guess so. Maybe he thinks we should all have muzzle-loading black powder muskets just to give the bad guys a reasonable chance of succeeding in their evil deeds. …

Muroff’s misunderstanding of the 2nd Amendment shines through. There is nothing in the Constitution that ties gun ownership to hunting or even self-defense. We simply have the right to own guns and liberal douchebags like him don’t have a right to mess with that.

That is because when push comes to shove, the right to own guns is not prominently featured in the Constitution to defend us from rapists and murderers, but from people like Dan Muroff.

Dan Muroff
Muroff wants to give home invaders a sporting chance.

On a tip from Steve A. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Leave a Comment

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend