ABC’s Jonathan Karl pressed Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action Chris Cox on why civilians needed to own weapons like the Sig Sauer MCX used in the Orlando attack, a semi-automatic rifle designed for military and law enforcement use.
Karl demanded to know why civilians needed to be able to use a “military-style assault weapon” like that. Cox merely said that the weapon at issue was outlawed in Paris, Brussels, and San Bernardino, Calif., where terrorist attacks took place. “Criminals are not going to be deterred by another gun law,” he said.
Karl tried again: “Help us understand why people need what have been branded ‘weapons of war,’ a weapon like that. Why do people need those on the streets of America? Why should they be legal?”
“It’s a fair question,” Cox said, before again deflecting by pointing out that the weapons had been banned in places where terror attacks occurred.
Asked if the NRA would budge if Trump asked them to support a ban on weapons sales to people on the terrorist watch-list, Cox deflected, saying the NRA already agreed with Trump and described any supposed conflict of interest as a “media-created diversion.”
[image via screengrab]
Have a tip we should know? firstname.lastname@example.org