Things are heating up throughout the United States when it comes to guns, gun control and the second amendment. You have celebrities saying that we need stricter gun control, but yet they make a living making movies that has more death than a major war. They say, well, if we limit the amount of bullets in a magazine, that will make it harder for someone to be able to fire a large amount of bullets, and when they take a second to change magazines it would give people a chance to either stop the shooter or people to escape. In theory that sounds really great, but in reality, it doesn’t quite work that way. The bottom line is, if magazine limits are imposed on law-abiding citizens you are only limiting them from protecting themselves. I read a really good analogy that really struck home.
A woman is home alone with her two children and three armed intruders break into her home in the middle of the night. With no lights on, she grabs her 9mm and shoots a couple warning shots and to no avail they keep coming. She then shoots at the intruders, hitting one of them before her seven rounds are spent. She fumbles around to retrieve another magazine, but drops it in the dark and she is over-taken by the intruders.
This is an nightmare that could come true. Can you imagine what that would be like? Could you be calm enough to be able to handle this situation? I hope that no one reading this will ever have to find out, but wouldn’t it be nice if you didn’t have to fumble around to try and save your families lives?
The one thing that really bothers me, is that in addition to that law, the government is trying to ban what they call “Assault Weapons.” Lets think about what they call an assault weapon and what an assault weapon is.
They would like you to believe that an AR15, which can come in 22, 223 or other similar calibers that are common in many weapons that are legal. This scary weapon is a “Semi-Automatic,” which means on bullet is fired every time the trigger is pulled. It is considered an assault weapon only because it looks like the same weapons that the military uses. The difference is, is that the military model has a select fire mechanism that allows you to use semi-auto, three round burst or fully automatic fire. Of course they both have those scary large capacity magazines which according to a representative from Colorado says if you shoot all the bullets out of a magazine, you can’t use it again. They say if it has a folding stock, or a pistol grip then the civilian model is classified as an assault weapon.
But wait a minute, lets look at some FBI Crime Statistics (which are compiled here Ban These) :
- From 2007 until 2011 homicide deaths by rifle was on a steady decline 453, 380, 351, 367 and 323 respectfully.
- In the same time period, homicide deaths by personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc…) were 869, 875, 817, 769 and 728.
Under the logic of those who are wanting to ban assault rifles, they should also ban parts of your body, right? Assault feet? Anything that someone uses to um… assault someone else is an assault weapon (this is where the common sense comes in).
In the same compilation you will find that there are many other things that kill more people than guns, which by the way, never have I seen a gun kill someone.
Try using this information on those in the media, Piers Morgan or some other celebrity who’s heart I am sure cries for anyone who is injured or killed by violence and they will side-step your information every time and blame the NRA, Conservatives or us unruly country people who cling to our guns, bible and the constitution. They want to make a name for themselves as the one, or the group that disarmed America, only to make it a more dangerous place for honest, law-abiding Americans to live. They say that the NRA is only in the fight because they make money off of scaring us, but let me tell you, being an NRA member makes me 1. proud and 2. glad that I have someone on my side to protect my rights! I guess what I am really saying is “I am the NRA!”
Maybe, just maybe if these people who want to ban certain guns would open their minds more instead of their mouths and realize what the problem really is here, then maybe they can make a difference. Not one gun ever shot a person on it’s own. Limiting what an honest American can have only allows criminals to win. I read an article once that the author interviewed a career criminal who went up and down the east coast. He was asked if there was any place he would not invade a home, and his answer was, West Virginia. When asked why, he stated that he would not even attempt it there because everyone had a gun in West Virginia and they were not afraid to use them.
I think that is enough said.
Jeff Nichols' Outdoors 