What do the following have in common? Poison gas, knives, handguns, dynamite,
ammonium nitrate and motor fuel, semi-automatic weapons, surgical instruments, arson, military looking automatic rifles, box cutters, blunt objects, airplanes, unmanned drones? Answer, they have all been used as weapons in mass killings within the past eighteen years. How many of the items does the government propose banning? The answer is, only one, military looking automatic rifles.
How many mass killing do NOT involve firearms at all. The answer is one third of them. Among those mass killings utilizing guns, what is the most often used? The handgun is the most used gun in mass killings.
For what percentage of the nation’s homicides do mass killings account? The answer is around 1 percent. So, if a ban resulted in stopping any mass killing, it would be a miniscule percentage of the larger problem.
Given the above, all of which is documentable by a Google search of “Weapons used in mass killings”, why is the government dead set on banning that which they incorrectly term as “assault weapons?”
Will such a ban stop mass killings? No it will not! There are dozens of other weapons, not including firearms, which are equally as effective.
Will it reduce the body count in such killings? Again, the answer is no. The shooter at Sandy Hook carried a Glock automatic pistol. Armed with that and preloaded clips, he could have accomplished his carnage in about the same time.
In Chicago, with very strict gun control laws, 62 school children were murdered last year. Connecticut has some of the most stringent gun control regulations in the country, yet those regulations did not stop the Sandy Hook massacre. BOTH CHICAGO AND CONNECTICUT HAVE ASSAULT WEAPONS BANS. So much for gun control!
Why, then, the mad push to ban certain firearms? Do not be fooled. It is not about the “assault weapons”. It is about eroding the Second Amendment, a little at a time. The gun control lobby knows it cannot attack the Second Amendment head-on They know that would cause a nationwide uprising, the likes of which has not been seen by anyone living today. So, their only path to the ultimate goal of disarming the American citizenry is to chip away slowly. Today, the “assault weapons”, tomorrow semi-automatic rifles, etc until there is nothing left! Then, we are not citizens, we are subjects.
The gun control lobby lives and thrives on such tragedies as the Sandy Hook shooting, because they give them ammunition with which to advance their cause of disarming American citizens.
In the weeks to come, they will be spreading a lot of disinformation, probably supported locally by some MDJ columnists including Kevin Foley. Some of the misinformation they will spread is already being spread by the nationwide gun control shouters.
- Banning “assault weapons” will stop, or greatly reduce, mass killings. Wrong. People bent on killing do not need assault weapons, as has been demonstrated time after time.
- The Second Amendment applies only to weapons available at the time it was written. Wrong. It does not limit the type of arms we can keep and bear.
- The Second Amendment applies only to militia. Wrong. It confirms that a “well regulated militia” is necessary, but it says the “right of the people”, not the militia, to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon.
- The Second Amendment only applies to hunters. Wrong. The Second Amendment is in place to confirm the rights of citizens to protect themselves against foreign invasion, or internal tyranny.
- The Second Amendment does not give us the right to own weapons. That is correct. It does not “give” us the right. We are born with the right. It CONFIRMS that right. Government does not grant rights. Government can only confirm, try to limit or deny the rights with which we were “endowed by our creator”.
- People do not need “assault weapons.” Such is a judgment without basis in fact, because of the nebulous meaning of the word “assault weapons”. As has been demonstrated, a box cutter, or a kitchen knife, can be an effective “assault weapon”. Would you ban box cutters, or cutlery? While it is true that nobody needs a rapid fire weapon to shoot a deer, the right to keep and bear arms is not about shooting deer.
Do not be misled into surrendering your liberty. As Ben Franklin said, ”If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both.”