Category: Gun Rights

A Metaphor for Mendacity

On By Tom LindsayIn Gun Rights, NRA, RKBA, Safety

Since the Newtown school shootings last month, the anti-gun factions in this country have tried to change the vocabulary they use. No longer are there calls for “more gun control,” or even “common sense gun control.” The call now is for “gun safety.”

Tweet 1

Tweet 2

Yet, when I asked these two for clarification of what safety measures they would like to see in new laws, they came back with the same tired gun control mantras like “no automatic weapons in society.”

Be not fooled. The left will talk about safety, but the only safety that would satisfy them would be total confiscation. Nothing has changed.

Reaching Out

On By Tom LindsayIn Gun Rights, Politics3 Comments

Inspired by Robb Allen at Sharp As A Marble, I just sent this email to my congressman, and I will be sending very similar emails to my senators:

The Honorable Phil Gingrey, MD
Washington, DC

Dr. Gingrey:

The recent shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school was a horrific event of evil performed by a deranged individual. It is an emotional event for the entire country and there seems to be a cry for someone to ‘do something’. As a father of two, this has been especially painful for me.

However, the actions of this individual belong to him and him alone. The calls for “gun control” or a new “assault weapons ban” are an emotional response that ends up placing the blame for this event on the estimated 80,000,000 gun owners in the US. Connecticut already has the 5th most restrictive gun laws in the states as well as an AWB in place and yet this did not prevent anything. Columbine happened during the original AWB as well. This clearly indicates that bans on cosmetic features has no effect on those who wish to harm others. Punishing the innocent did nothing to stop these monsters, punishing us harder will have the same effect – none;

Any new gun control restrictions will only turn millions upon millions of law abiding citizens into overnight felons and yet events like these will not be stopped. Criminals who do not care about the death of others will not be dissuaded by a fear of a felony charge by having a magazine of inappropriate size or a folding stock.

There is nothing wrong with calling for a conversation on the violence in our nation. Gun owners such as myself tend to be some of the most law abiding citizens in the States and we’re always discussing what can be done to lower the frequency of such tragedies. However, blaming the tool used is not an appropriate response and I ask that you protect the rights of every American citizen by refraining from calling for further gun control which has been proven time and time again to be ineffective in stopping crime and in fact only increase crime by creating more and more criminals.

Your record on this issue means we can count on you to be a voice of reason, not emotion. Please do what you can to make sure calmer and more reasoned thought prevails. Your response is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,
xxxxxxxxx

I urge you to do the same, and follow up next week with a phone call. If your representative will be in the area for the holidays, schedule an office visit.

We will only get the chance to give our side of the issue once.

A History Lesson

On By Tom LindsayIn Gun Rights, RKBA2 Comments

Mil guns.

“Why does anyone need to own a military gun?”

You hear it from the anti-gun crowd, who fear the gun with a phobia. And, strangely, you hear it from hunters, who look on the new technology with disdain, unaware that they are reinforcing the anti-gun crowd’s message.

With the recent events in the news, I hear it on TV and in the media all the time, so I thought I might take a minute to convey this history lesson.

First, every gun started out as a military gun. That was the nature of the invention. Firearms development is expensive, and the expense can only be justified and recouped by a lucrative government contract. Thus has it ever been, until recent expansions of the market represented by hunting guns made it sustainable of itself.

Second, especially to the hunters, I say, your argument has been made from the beginning, and dismissed. The first hunters to field muskets were probably vocally abused by archers. Then, musket hunters looked down on muzzle loading rifle users, who in turn reviled breach loading rifle users, who then shunned bolt action rifle users. And, remember, the elegant bolt action of the revered Remington* Model 700 is, in fact, the Mauser 98 action, fielded by Hitler’s best.

New guns are introduced all the time, because they are more accurate, lighter, and better. The new “modern sporting rifle” is no exception. Yes, it is based on the AR-15 platform. Get used to it, and get over it.

+++++

Ironically, there are those who argue that civilians have no need to own a military rifle. These same people argue that the militia clause in the Second Amendment – “A well regulated militia” –  means  that only the organized militia has the right to own guns, not individuals.

However, in that vein, the Supreme Court, in the case of DC v. Heller, held that the Second Amendment was an individual right. The militia clause (which they called the prefatory clause) explains this, when one understands that the militia, today as in 1791, consists of all able bodied citizens of military age.

Here’s where the irony comes in: these people who claim the militia clause precludes individual ownership of any gun, turn around and ignore the militia clause when considering military guns. In fact, in the same Heller case, the Supreme Court held

“It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service – M16 rifles and the like – may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home.”

Thus, not only is it every citizen’s right to own guns, it is our right to own military guns, since the highest calling of that right would be in defense of the security of our free state.

 

 

* Edited. The original posting said “Winchester Model 700” which doesn’t exist. (Without this note the comment wouldn’t make any sense . . .)

How To Prevent Mass Shootings

On By Tom LindsayIn Gun Free Zones, Gun Rights, Molon Labe, Paradigm Shift, RKBA2 Comments

Like most Americans, I was saddened and outraged by the shootings last week in Newtown, Connecticut. My heart goes out to the parents, children, and citizens of that town, and the responders and others involved.

As expected, the media and the President have completely avoided the true nature of this tragedy, and, in so doing, will avoid the best lasting actions we can take to prevent them in the future.

The real cause of this shooting wasn’t evil assault rifles, or high capacity clips, or lack of gun safes. It was the concept of the “gun free zone.”

The people in that school, as in schools across America, were completely at the mercy of anyone who decided to come in with the intent of doing them harm. The same goes for anyone at a venue that has been declared off limits to guns.

That’s because criminals and nutjobs don’t pay attention to the signs on the door. And it’s not because the penalties for violating the gun free zone are too lax, as someone from the CSGV once tried to argue with me. No amount of penalty will deter someone who is determined to break the law, especially since the threat of life in prison or execution isn’t going to deter them from murder.

So, how do we prevent this kind of incident in the future? Simply, do away with gun free zones.

Of course, the first argument that follows is that armed children, or teachers, or anyone, would not be expected to be able to prevail in a gun battle with someone so heavily armed. Unfortunately this argument misses the nature of these incidents as well.

You see, it isn’t the armed teacher or customer that wins this battle, so much as the threat of armed teachers or customers.

Just the possibility of the presence armed resistance will keep our children and shoppers and worshipers safe. Why? Because the people who perpetrate these horrific acts are cowards through and through. In every instance, when confronted by the first responder with a gun, they kill themselves.

If you need proof, look my home town of Kennesaw, Georgia. Famously, every homeowner is required by a city ordinance to own a gun. And the theaters and malls around allow guns to be carried. And, as a result, the crime rate here is among the lowest in the country, and, more to the point, there has never been a mall shooting or theater shooting here, ever.

In fact, even normal armed robbery has been prevented on at least one occasion, because of the presence of civilians, lawfully carrying guns.

So, the real course to take is two-fold. First, enhance the care we give to the mentally ill, and develop a system to integrate their treatment with the NICS background system. This is tricky ground, though, because of health privacy concerns, and I won’t offer anything beyond that.

But, regardless of what we do with the mentally ill, we must act to abolish government mandated gun free zones.

As gun owners and consumers, we can do our part by avoiding businesses that choose to prohibit lawful carry of firearms, and make sure the owners of those businesses know we are doing so.

And, in the meantime, we must continue the course, and remind those who want to latch on to an inanimate object as a cause of evil, that it is, instead, evil people who are at fault, and evil people, by their nature, will merely laugh at your attempts to take their guns. And, we must remind them that the end game of any gun confiscation scheme they may enact is that only the evil people will have guns, and that they will then be at the mercy of evil people. By then it will be too late.