Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Libertarian VP Wants to Ban Guns; Rifles are “Weapons of Mass Destruction”

On August 3rd, 2016, the Libertarian candidate for vice president, William Weld, was interviewed on REVOLT TV.

REVOLT TV Chief Political Correspondent Amrit Singh asked candidate Weld about legislation and his views on guns.  A short video clip of the relevant section has been posted on Youtube by occupy the media.  The gun segment starts right away in the clip.

William Weld:

“The five shot rifle, that is a standard military rifle, the problem is if you attach a clip to it that holds more shells and if you remove the pin so that it becomes an automatic weapon, and those are independent criminal offences.  That is when they  become, essentially, a weapon of mass destruction.  The problem with handguns probably is even worse than the problem of the AR15.”

 Amrit Singh:

“What can you do to help control this flow of guns, if anything?”


William Weld:

 “You shouldn’t have anybody who is on the terrorist watch list buy any gun at all.”

 

Link to video

William Weld was United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts from 1981 to 1986. He was governor of Massachusetts from 1991 to 1997. He should know that the ban on “high capacity magazines” is independent of them being inserted into a rifle; it onlyapplies to magazines made after 1994, and applies to magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds, not 5.  There is a five round limit for shotguns.  He was governor when these limitations were put in place.

Weld also opined extensively on the recent police shooting of Philando Castile in Minnesota.  He was certain that the police officer had committed a criminal offense and that the officer would be going to jail.  He misquotes what Philando Castile’s girlfriend said on video; then he claims that it was Philando Castile who said it.

Weld: Having said “I have a license to carry, you do not mind if I reach for it, do you?”

As an attorney, he seems to have little care for the rule of law, due process, and the idea of “innocent until proven guilty”.

The officers involved are under investigation, and are unable to give their side of the story yet.  At the minimum, it would be prudent to say that we should wait until the investigation is concluded before making innocent or guilty judgements.

Libertarians have traditionally been the party with the strongest support for Second Amendment rights, and upholding the rule of law as defined by the Constitution.

These statements seem unlikely to resonate with the Libertarian base.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch


 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Send this to friend