Are revolvers the most reviled of firearms available?

A great many claims have been made regarding firearms, as well as a great many proposed restrictions that are not only nonsensical, but also unworkable, and serve no purpose in even being proposed to begin with.

In nearly all cases, every nonsensical claim and ludicrous proposed restriction pertains almost exclusively to semi-automatic firearms. Often this is because these are the only types of firearms to which the proposals are applicable. Ultimately this leads to the question, are revolvers the most reviled type of firearms currently available on the private market in the united states?

In general terms, revolvers do not classify as being "high capacity" due to most holding five or six rounds, although some hold seven, eight, and even ten rounds of ammunition in the cylinder, thus putting them on par with most subcompact semi-automatic pistols. The presently accepted definition of a "high capacity" magazine that can be prohibited from ownership is anything that holds eleven or more rounds of ammunition, meaning revolvers cannot be touched by such.

Nor do revolvers eject spent shell casings from discharged rounds of ammunition, meaning there are no casings to collect at crime scenes, thus rendering the proposal of microstamping requirements to aid law enforcement completely useless.

Out of all firearms currently available on the market in the united states, the revolver appears to be the most difficult for supporters of firearm-related restrictions to generate public support for prohibiting and outlawing. Other firearms are far easier to demonize, but the revolver is simply not among them because it undermines all political narrative, while still being fully capable of being used to murder anyone, up to and including the commission of a mass shooting.

 

Personally, I think most of the restrictions put forward as "common sense" by GCA are utterly devoid of any sense whatsoever. Restrictions such as they propose are inevitably arbitrary and capricious.

When it comes to revolvers, I have to chuckle. I have a visceral affection for them, having grown up using them. My grandfather was an old-school lawman who much preferred "wheelguns" to "jamamatics"; the larger the caliber the better. "If it don't start with '4' then it better end with 'Magnum'!" he told me more than once.

Today, of course, everyone wants polymer-frame wondernines and similar variants, and I can certainly understand that. However, a man with a revolver who knows what he's doing can hardly be described as being "poorly armed"!

 

Nice gun! Which model?

 

Handgun regulations are the key to gun control

 

Thank you, sir!

That one's a model 624 .44 Special. Exceptionally smooth and accurate sixgun. Essentially the same gun as my grandfather's S&W 1950 Target .44, but in stainless steel.

 

And are just as arbitrary and capricious.

 

Not at all. They can be reasonable and measured

 

Maybe; but I've never seen it.

 

I had the S&W 686 and enjoyed shooting it but hated cleaning it. I regret selling it now.

 

Constitutional Amendment is the only path to gun control...

 

Uh.....we have gun control now

 

No, we have unconstitutional infringements with courts to cowardly to admit it...

 

In your opinion. Noted

 

Indeed, I'm expressing my opinions on a message board dedicated to political opinions, shocking!!!

Anyway, most 'gun control' is an infringement on the federal level, the state level is separate, but barely. The wording in the Constitution is clear, there is nothing more clear in the whole document. The courts have failed America by allowing infringements and all courts that followed have compounded the problem by failing to stop it.

 

Thank you you for your opinion which is a radical extreme interpretation of the second amendment that is not held by not only every scotus justice but virtually every legal scholar.


But you are entitled to your opinion

 

Its never extreme to know how to read, and the 2nd is clear as day. Its the extremists who try to change what's clear as day into convoluted nonsense because they don't like it. That goes as equally for you as for the trashy activist judges who allowed it up to this point...

 

Thank you for your opinion which is a fringe extremist legal opinion held by almost no expert on constitutional law

 

That's a clear falsehood on your end. 'Legal experts' tend to all work in what would be considered the judiciary side. The only reason activist judges exist is to empower the judiciary, like allowing clear infringements on the Constitutional rights of every citizen in a personal power grab. The judiciary recognized that they were by far the weakest branch of government and quickly stepped up their efforts to increase their power by creating 'rulings' that enhanced the power of the judiciary and that has continued to this day. There is no way a literate person with an ounce of integrity can't understand what 'shall not be infringed' means...

 

So you believe in no gun control of any kind in state or federal law......correct?

 

I believe the state has some regulatory role, but cannot restrict the private ownership of firearms from the individual. Outside of small arms, ie .50 cal or less, there could be a government role, but that's another argument entirely...

 

Regulatory role? Government role? Where is that in the second amendment?

 

Notice it is qualified it with no role on small arms, once you move into other items I allow for a regulatory role, such as the Department of Energy to regulate ideas like nuclear material, as I know you'll being bringing garage nukes in the next post otherwise. Whereas the Department of Transportation might have a legitimate role in regulating the use of fighter aircraft in our skies, or tanks on our roads, all of which would be outside the 2nd...

 

Indeed, regulating hands is the joy for Democrats.

 

Without regulation....you would likely be dead.

You're welcome

 

I am not clear on regulations on tanks since civilians do own and operate some. A local man had a huge collection of such heavy vehicles all able to engage.