***The Iowa Standard is an independent media voice. We rely on the financial support of our readers to exist. Please consider a one-time sign of support or becoming a monthly supporter at $5, $10/month - whatever you think we're worth! If you’ve ever used the phrase “Fake News” — now YOU can actually DO something about it! You can also support us on PayPal at [email protected] or Venmo at Iowa-Standard-2018 or through the mail at: PO Box 112 Sioux Center, IA 51250

United States Sen. Chuck Grassley was issued a challenge by his Democrat opponent, Mike Franken, after Grassley said at a meeting earlier this month he doesn’t know much about guns and doesn’t love guns.

Grassley was asked where he stands on Red Flag laws and allowing 18-year-olds to purchase AR-15s, according to Iowa Starting Line.

Advertisement

Grassley said he would examine Red Flag laws to see if they contain due process.

The woman asked Grassley if he thought the authors of the Second Amendment thought “these weapons” would be “out there” when it was written.

“No, no, no, no. They wouldn’t have thought that,” he said.

She asked if an 18-year-old should be allowed to buy an AR.

“In 19 states you can’t,” Grassley said.

She asked about Iowa.

“I don’t know, you’ll have to ask your Iowa legislator,” Grassley said. “I don’t know what the law is in Iowa.”

He then said she is talking to “somebody who doesn’t know much about guns.”

“Because I haven’t shot a gun I’ll be in 20, 40 or 50 years. And I’ve got one little gun that hasn’t been shot during that period of time. So you aren’t talking to somebody who loves guns. I don’t hate guns. But I do protect peoples’ constitutional rights.”

Franken challenged Grassley to go to a gun range with him.

“My opponent, Chuck Grassley, says he doesn’t know much about guns, hasn’t shot one in 40, 50 years,” Franken said.

Franken asked Grassley to pull the trigger of an AR-15 and feel its power.

“See how accurately 30 rounds pass through a target. How fast you can reload another magazine with just a bit of practice. Then tell me you still think anyone should be able to walk into a gun show, buy one from a private seller, no questions asked. Just name the time and place, I’ll be there,” he said.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

2 COMMENTS

  1. A rag-tag group of people beat a world class super power because not only did we have superior weapons, we also had proto-Americans shooting at the Redcoats from “behind every blade of grass”.

    And if they came by water, we had privateers damage or sink British warships with their own cannons. Look up “Letters of marque” in our Constitution.

    And to coordinate the war making ability of all these people defending their inalienable right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, the bill of rights acknowledges the right of States (not the US) to form Militias to defend the individual States. With militia defined as composed of able-bodied people aged 16 and over.

    The issue of guns when used to commit crimes has nothing to do with guns but with the criminal. Barring access to guns, murderers use cars or other objects.

    Are we going to ban cars because of the Waukesha or the Central Park massacres, just to name two out of many? Look to Europe. How many innocent people lost their lives to murderers driving cars or trucks, at least 500.

    Grassley’s problem is that he swore an oath to the Constitution, but like guns, he doesn’t know much about it. He knows about “due process” which is lip service as he ignores the violation of due process inflicted on the J6 POWs among other incidents. But obviously doesn’t understand the meaning of “shall not be infringed”, nor the history behind our States demanding that it be included in the 10 point list of rights that the US is barred from tampering with.

    Simply put, Grassley is wilfully tampering with our sacred rights, which he swore not to do ever since he first stepped into office. For shame, oath-breaker!

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here