Federal Judge Calls for confiscation of semi-auto rifles and magazines.

Why is this man smiling? Because he evidently hasn't heard about the iron-clad Law of Unintended Consequences.

David Codrea reacts with justifiable anger in a post called The Nazgul Speaks. He is referring to an incredible column in the LA Times by Federal Judge Larry Alan Burns entitled A conservative case for an assault weapons ban(!?!)

Bring back the assault weapons ban, and bring it back with some teeth this time. Ban the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer and possession of both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Don't let people who already have them keep them. Don't let ones that have already been manufactured stay on the market. I don't care whether it's called gun control or a gun ban. I'm for it.

I say all of this as a gun owner. I say it as a conservative who was appointed to the federal bench by a Republican president. I say it as someone who prefers Fox News to MSNBC, and National Review Online to the Daily Kos. I say it as someone who thinks the Supreme Court got it right in District of Columbia vs. Heller, when it held that the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to possess guns for self-defense. (That's why I have mine.) I say it as someone who, generally speaking, is not a big fan of the regulatory state.

Riiiiight. . . Well, all I can say is that if he gets his way, he will no doubt be tried in the Court that enforces the Law of Unintended Consequences. And that is a court that pays no attention to your position or station in life where the juries are often made up of the victims of the accused and the Judge is not squeamish about maximum sentences.