NY Assemblyman Decries Debate Over ‘Ticky-Tacky’ Gun Aspects Rather than Gun Control Itself

In the eyes of the law, definitions matter. A 16-inch barrel on an AR-15 is perfectly legal. A 15.9-inch barrel is a felony. While that’s stupid, there is always going to be a line where legality turns into illegality. Without those shining, bright lines in the sand we’re never supposed to cross, anyone can be declared a felon despite doing everything right.

Of course, even with those lines, stuff still happens.

Regardless, the laws are what they are, and in the wake of the shooting in Manhattan earlier this week, we’re now debating a lot of stuff.

But one New York assemblyman is really bothered that we’re talking about details, rather than just gun control.

On Tuesday’s broadcast of “CNN News Central,” New York Assemblyman Alex Bores (D) said that “it is finally time for us to have a nationwide ban on assault weapons, on these AR-15-style weapons.” But “we shouldn’t be in these discussions on the ticky-tacky aspects of the specific guns. We need to be taking action to keep people safe. Exactly where we draw the line on exactly what kind of weapon, we can discuss.”

Bores said, “I think it’s, as our governor said this morning, it is finally time for us to have a nationwide ban on assault weapons, on these AR-15-style weapons. Now, this one was a pistol and a different one, and I expect many of my colleagues in elected office to pick at specific distinctions in weapons. But what’s clear is no one should have a magazine that can shoot 30 rounds. No one should have such a high-powered and maneuverable weapon and be able to walk around city streets or drive it into our state.”

Bores was asked by the host if the weapon was a pistol, to which he replied, “Technically, it’s defined as a pistol, though, obviously, it had a shoulder stock. And so, to the eye, many would call it an assault rifle.”

So, to his eye, it’s an assault rifle, even though it meets the legal definition of a pistol.

Who is being ticky-tacky now?

He gripes about 30-round magazines, but what about 29 rounds? 28? Where is the arbitrary, ticky-tacky limit of what’s acceptable and what isn’t? Why is 30 rounds a problem when a 10-round magazine can be swapped out easily enough when no one is able to fight back?

Hell, just about every gun control law out there plays with the ticky-tacky things to some degree or another, and all ignore the reality that bad people can and will do bad things. Take away AR-style firearms, and they’ll just use handguns. Take those away, and they’ll use shotguns. Take those away, and they’ll use knives.

It’s the evil person that’s the problem. That’s always been the problem.

It’s not ticky-tacky to say so. Somehow, Bores didn’t seem to bring that particular bit up. Weird, right?

I mean, it’s almost like “ticky-tacky” is only bad when it’s in the way of what he wants. It’s perfectly acceptable when it’s his own ticky-tacky perceptions being applied, up to and including the blaming of an inanimate object.