Sen. Dick Durbin Opens Hearing into Trump Assassination Attempt by Criticizing ‘Easy Access to AR-15 Rifles’

 

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) opened the hearing into the Trump assassination attempt Tuesday by targeting “easy access to AR-15 rifles.”

Durbin began his comments by talking about movies and books depicting “the international assassin with sophisticated technology, elaborate plans, [and] well honed skills, [who] sets out to kill a leading political figure in the United States.”

He quickly shifted gears to state that reality is quite different. In other words, the actual would-be alleged assassin was “a 20-year-old, introverted college student” who “outsmarted one of the most sophisticated American law enforcement agencies in history.”

Durbin segued, saying, “There is more to this story and other aspects we’ve got to consider as well.”

He then targeted America’s favorite rifle, the AR-15. “We cannot lose sight of the factor that contributed to the violence on July 13 — widespread, easy access to AR-15 military-style rifles.”

Durbin continued, “While we rely on the Secret Service to protect elected officials, we must acknowledge the unique challenges they face in light of the proliferation of ‘weapons of war’ on our streets.”

He then zeroed in on Pennsylvania gun laws, noting, “Pennsylvania, like many states, allows individuals to openly carry a loaded rifle without a permit. To make matters worse, ‘assault rifles’ can easily be purchased from unlicensed dealers without a background check because of dangerous loopholes in our gun laws.”

Durbin did not mention that the gun used in the Trump assassination was legally purchased, which means more point-of-sale background checks would not have hindered the shooting in the least.

Moreover, Durbin pointed out that AR-15-style rifles were used in Newtown (December 14, 2012), Uvalde (May 24, 2022), and Las Vegas (October 1, 2017). However, he did not point out that the AR-15 used in Newtown was stolen, and the guns used in Uvalde and Las Vegas were legally purchased. Again, no additional point-of-sale background check would have made a difference.

Brought to you by Dr Hemlock