See what I'm getting at. It is in part atleast, a bad law.
I didn't say that the bill was a good idea. I said the NRA misrepresented it by saying that it applied to "almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting". The great majority of rifle ammo is not designed or marketed as armor piercing, so the NRA's statement was incorrect.
Just remember, the people who decide:
what guns you may purchase with your own money(at least, what they let you keep),
where you may store them(remember, it's just common sense that a stolen gun's rightful owner be punished for crimes committed by someone else in unlawful possession of the weapon, if he did not "properly secure" his own property),
in what state you may store them(really, why would anyone in the nation's crime-riddled capitol need to keep a weapon assembled or even *loaded*?),
what sort of ammunition you may keep in them("cop-killer" bullets? "armor-piercing" bullets?),
and many more factors - ANY ONE OF WHICH may affect whether you live or die in a gunfight or whether a gunfight actually occurs(but remember, your guns don't deter crimes - they "have only one purpose, to kill people") -
Use phrases like "The shoulder thing that goes up".
Don't even try to tell me that lawmakers are going to give us the benefit of the doubt. They're in their own world, and all that matters to them is the perpetuation of that world.
Why, anyway, are we debating this? I agree that the NRA(of which I am not a member, nor do I wish to be) is not perfectly precise regarding Obama's record on 2A issues(precision and accuracy are two different things). So what? They're a political organization with an agenda. They're going to spin his statements to instill fear in readers, and any intelligent consumer of information should know to take any propaganda with a grain of salt.
Can you tell me that Obama has been consistent on any specific gun issue("common sense", his favorite catch-all phrase, is not specific)? He stated that the DC ban was Constitutional, before he stated that he supported the DC v. Heller ruling. His interpretation of the ruling is VASTLY different from my interpretation, but that's another thread.
To sum it all up, the NRA has made imprecise, somewhat misleading statements about Obama. Are they all that far from the truth? I don't think so. I do agree with the general consensus here, however; the truth is frightening enough.
Edit:
Why do you hate America Dave?
Don't go there. He's been perfectly civil.