|
| | | | |
|
|
Brothers in Arms
By Joseph Pickett
June 15, 2003
KeepAndBearArms.com -- I hunted once long ago -
a most unsuccessful squirrel hunting expedition with Dad in 1986. While I
enjoyed tromping in the woods with Dad's 12 gauge Remington and soaking in the
blissful silence and quiet beauty of southern Ohio's rolling green hills, my
passion for firearms today has little to do with long guns and hunting. I'm more
interested in handguns, personal protection, and defending my family and me from
those who would harm us.
Though I'm more into Kahr Arms than Bushmaster, utter the words 'assault weapons
ban' around me and I go on full automatic invective. I vehemently oppose this
silly busy-body legislative nonsense that does almost nothing to stop criminals
and restricts the freedoms of law-abiding sportsmen and ordinary folks defending
their property. With a little luck, this obscene legislation will die quietly
next year when Congress does not reauthorize it. I may not have wielded a shot
gun since I was an adolescent, but any attack on our 2nd Amendment rights is an
attack on all of us. We're all in this fight for our rights together.
There go the wails and cries from the anti-gun bigots: "Aha! Another gun-hugging
whack-job who opposes 'sensible and reasonable gun control laws!' These people
are extremists! I bet they'd let anyone buy bazookas if they could! How can
anyone oppose the ban of dangerous guns that thugs use to slaughter kids, Girl
Scouts, and cute puppies?"
To paraphrase a particular former president, it all depends what the definition
of 'sensible and reasonable' is. Gun grabbers tend to seize the 'sensible and
reasonable' middle ground with their rhetoric, but the results are anything but
to the millions of law-abiding gun owners in America. Quite a few supposed
'sensible and reasonable gun control laws,' including the 'assault weapons' ban,
inevitably morphed into something other than sensible and reasonable - more like
mindless, emotion-driven Trojan Horse dictates that do little to nothing to stop
crime but run roughshod over our Constitutional rights.
The halls of Congress are littered with examples of freedom-choking anti-gun
legislation that should never be allowed to become law. Take the misguided
efforts regarding gun shows and background checks on private gun sales. Sen.
John McCain really has his dress over his head on this one.
As most know, mandatory background checks have been in effect at gun shows for
years on licensed dealers. This has done very little to stop crime - only about
.7 (that's 7/10th of 1 percent) percent of criminal guns come from gun shows.
Still, if it takes only a few minutes and I receive my gun then and there, I can
deal with the background check.
That fight won, now the gun grabbers are pulling a classic bait-and-switch that
would make the most odious used car salesman proud. Their latest holy grail is
to close the mythical 'gun show loophole.' Their goal is to mandate background
checks for Joe Six Pack who brings a gun from his collection to sell at the
show. Calling this a loophole is disingenuous at best, and a lesser gentleman
might call it a bald-faced, scum-sucking lie. Mr. Six Pack selling his 30.06
hunting rifle at a gun show is a private sale of a gun by a person who is not a
gun dealer. Background checks don't apply to private sales, be it at a gun show,
in my garage, basement arsenal, wheat field, or the nearest donut shop. Gun
grabbers are quietly trying to use 'sensible' legislation passed for one stated
purpose - requiring backgrounds checks at gun shows by licensed dealers - for an
ominous, hidden purpose - restricting the private sale of guns between citizens.
Outrageous! If the gun-grabbers succeed in regulating the private sale of
firearms at gun shows, does anyone seriously believe they will saunter off into
the sunset, fat and happy? Hardly. They will turn to the next target -
regulating private firearm sales everywhere else.
Precisely the same scenario has played out with the 'assault weapons' ban.
Anti-gunners foisted this seriously flawed legislation upon the public under the
guise of public safety after a deranged killer opened fire on children at an
elementary school in California in 1989 with a semi-automatic look-alike of an
AK-47 fully-automatic assault rifle. The man had a long criminal record and a
history of mental illness and should have been in jail. He killed 5 children and
wounded 29 others in his psychotic killing spree.
In typical fashion, the gun control crowd unleashed its unholy fury - at the
weapon the killer used. They also threw in a potent mix of deceit and deception
by capitalizing both on the gun's military appearance and the public's lack of
knowledge of firearms to create a new media boogeyman - the dreaded 'assault
weapon.'
There was just one problem: The look-alike AK-47 semi-automatic in question, and
other guns outlawed in the ban, aren't 'assault weapons.' These semi-automatic
weapons are legitimate firearms used legally by millions of average citizens for
hunting, home defense, and recreational shooting. True assault weapons are fully
automatic and have been outlawed for purchase by the general public since 1938.
But goose-stepping gun grabbers never let facts interfere with their agenda. A
new gun myth was born. 'Assault weapons,' which according to ignorant media
mavens included many semi-automatic rifles that had a cosmetic militaristic
appearance, were evil and had to be banned. And so they were. On September 13th,
1994, HR4296 a.k.a the Assault Weapons Ban, was enacted by Congress with the
support of President Clinton.
As is typical with legislation passed in a fit of emotion, banning those guns
had a minimal effect on crime. In fact, gun crimes committed with 'assault
weapons' was hardly epidemic prior to 1994:
- Over 100,000 police officers delivered a
message to Congress in 1990 stating that only 2% to 3% of crimes are committed
using a so-called "assault weapon."
- The New York Times reported that, "Although
New Jersey's pioneering ban on military-style assault rifles was sold to the
state as a crime-fighting measure, its impact on violence in the state... has
been negligible, both sides agree." Moreover, New Jersey police statistics
show that less than 1 percent of all crimes involve "assault rifles."
- The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported in
1995 that violent criminals only carry or use a "military-type gun" in about
one percent of the crimes nationwide.
- Less than four percent of all homicides in
the United States involve any type of rifle. No more than .8% of homicides are
perpetrated with rifles using military calibers. (And not all rifles using
such calibers are usually considered "assault weapons.")
The effect on law-abiding citizens, however,
has been more severe, because of the legislation's concentration on cosmetic
appearances rather than on actual functionality. The law specifically outlawed
19 different firearms, plus any firearm that can accept a detachable magazine,
and possesses two or more of the following features:
- Folding or telescopic stock
- Pistol grip protruding conspicuously beneath
the stock
- Bayonet mount
- Flash suppressor or threaded barrel
Every item on the list at has some practical purpose. For example, a folding or
telescopic stock allows the firearm to more easily be transported and stored,
and would also be useful in a home defense situation where maneuverability is
important. A flash suppressor reduces the visibility of the bright flash of
light that is sometimes produced by firing in the dark. This would be very
important for someone defending their family against an intruder in the middle
of the night, as the flash would tend to temporarily hamper the shooter's
vision.
The puny impact on crime rates and the brutal impact on citizens' rights reveal
the true nature of all-too-much gun legislation today. Enacting 'reasonable and
sensible gun laws' to 'reduce crime,' usually 'for the children,' is the false
excuse used to foist yet more gun regulations on the only people who obey them -
the law abiding. With more and more senseless gun legislation passing each year,
peaceful gun owners are finding their firearm options more and more limited and
expensive, which is precisely what the gun-grabbers are trying to accomplish.
Whether you are a hunter, target shooter, carry a gun for personal defense, or
simply believe in The Bill of Rights as written and not how East and Left Coast
intellectuals interpret it this week, opposing the renewal of the assault
weapons ban legislation is the only sensible and reasonable action a 2nd
Amendment-respecting citizen can take.
|
|
|
