Talk:One handgun a month law

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Firearms Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

What?

"The law does not require the purchase of a handgun if a person does not already possess one. Non-handgun owners are exempt. The law only restricts handgun purchases, and does not limit thefts of handguns. Organizations are exempt."

While not exactly incorrect, I do have doubts as to whether it's really necessary to explicitly state that the one handgun a month law is a limit to the maximum rate individuals can purchase handguns, rather than either forcing them to buy, or a natural law preventing the acquisition of firearms at greater than this speed. At best, it's poorly worded and simply states the obvious, and at worst it attempts to put a political spin on the article.

86.112.77.131 (talk) 21:14, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I removed that portion. Shadowjams (talk) 05:50, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]