So It Begins…The Disarming of Americans
So it begins…or should I say continues…The control of the people, by controlling their firearms. Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder, announced that he wants Obama to reinstate the Clinton’s so-called ban on assault weapons. This is nothing less than an assault on our right to bear arms and another effort for government to control our lives. Before you think me a radical, please seriously consider the following:
The firearms that are being called “assault weapons” under this ban are not at all assault weapons. An assault weapon is one that has the capability to be fired fully automatic. The weapons banned under the Clinton’s law were SEMI-automatic firearms. There is no army assault team in the world that would consider a semi-automatic firearm an assault weapon. So the objective here is not really “assault weapons” but semi-automatic weapons. Now consider this. In 2007 the democrats tried to float a bill that would have reinstated the assault ban. However, the list of so-called assault weapons under that bill was increased to include virtually any semi-automatic firearm including shotguns, hunting rifles, and pistols that loaded with a magazine, and virtually any rifle with a magazine. There were 83 specific firearms and or manufacturers that were on this list. The bill also included a general test for “assault weapons” which was simply this: any type firearm that has been used in military or police service or any firearm ruled by the attorney general to be an assault weapon. This means that virtually any gun could be made illegal. So technically they won’t eliminate the 2nd amendment, they will just make our guns and or bullets illegal. This has nothing to do with crime and everything to do with control.
But for the sake of argument let’s consider the question of whether laws against assault guns or any guns really do anything for our safety. The argument that getting rid of semi-automatic weapons reduces crime and makes us safer is simply a lie. Why? Because, by definition, criminals do NOT obey the law! So there is no legislation that will stop criminals from obtaining any weapon they choose. The only people that this law affects are the law abiding citizens. If you don’t believe this, look at some facts. A Yale economist named John Lott, did an 18 year study across every county in America to see if there was a correlation between guns and crime. The answer was unequivocally yes. Where there were more guns, there was less crime, thus the name of his book “More Guns Less Crime”. Why? It is simple. A firearm is first and foremost a deterrent! Criminals and thugs do not want a confrontation. They want an easy path so they go where there are fewer guns. There are two other great testaments to this correlation, but they are sad ones. Both England and Australia invoked massive gun control laws in the 1990′s. Shortly thereafter, these two countries’ violent crime rates skyrocketed. In a 2001 International Crime Victims Survey, by Leiden University of Holland showed the nation with the highest percentage of citizens victimized by violent crime was Australia, with 30% of its population. England posted a shocking 26% of its population. The United States by contrast was not even in the top ten list of industrialized nations who were tracked (data courtesy of Seven Myths of Gun Control, Richard Poe). The correlation is uncontestable! More guns less crime, less guns more crime.
The proponents of the assault ban repeatedly try to apply a “sporting use” test. They have been trying for years to restrict the use of firearms to purely a hunting or sporting purpose. Why, because they seek to water down the real purpose of the 2nd amendment, which is the ability to protect our rights from all attackers, including our government. There is nothing in the 2nd amendment about hunting or sporting use.
- In 2006 there were over 42,000 deaths from car accidents, yet we don’t ban cars!!!
The last reason we need semi-automatic and frankly fully automatic firearms, is to ensure that the power of the people remains the power of the people and not the state. Our founding fathers new this well. Anyone who says they were not contemplating this when they created the second amendment is a liar, pure and simple. Let’s recall the second amendment:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
At this point some people may be writing me off as a radical right winger. But before you put that epitaph on my tombstone, consider the words of one of our founding fathers on why he supported the 2nd amendment:
“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” Richard Henry Lee – 1787
Notice that there are no provisions in here for government legislation to regulate our firearms. It is clear as can be what the intent of our founders was on who should possess firearms: everyone and always.
For those that think I am simply bashing the left that is not true. I am speaking out against any politician or person who would want to take away my rights. By the way, a little known fact for many people is that George Bush authorized US Army forces to be stationed on our soil for the express purpose of dealing with us citizens in the case of public unrest (October 2008). This is a direct violation of the Posse Comitatus act, which essentially precludes US armed forces from being used against US Citizens. So in the words of the Swiss people: “a government that does not trust its own people, cannot be trusted.”
- I would also highly suggest getting your semi-automatic firearms purchased before it is too late (that is if you can). By the way, when the Supreme Court recently ruled that the 2nd amendment was in fact an individual right in the Heller v. Washington DC case, Eric Holder filed a brief arguing that the 2nd amendment was not an individual right. So do you really think his assault ban has anything to do with protecting us? Let me close with the wisdom of Richard Henry Lee:
“The first maxim of a man who loves liberty, should be never to grant to rulers an atom of power that is not most clearly and indispensably necessary for the safety and well being of society.”
By: Joseph Valentic, February 2009
