I was desperately attempting to avoid chiming in on the topic of gun control as I feel that I have nothing new to bring to the table on this subject. Yet, here I am prepared to draw at high noon on the idiocy behind the arguments used by gun control advocates and lobbyists. I have yet to see one talking point, driving truth, or logical argument used by anti-gun politicians and the citizens that back them and find much of their reasoning to be so asinine and unfounded that it insults my forward thinking brain. In the following rant I am going to dissect some of the more prominent anti-gun arguments and leave it to the public to decide who is left standing in this shootout. Of Course, according to those against gun rights, I do have the advantage due to the fact that I am unable to refrain from using my firearms when frustrated.
A popular talking point among the anti-gun crowd is this notion that we need to ban “assault” weapons from any and all civilian ownership. I can understand how one with a limited knowledge on firearms would have a lack of understanding on how little weight there is in this argument. My first problem with this argument is rooted in the fact that most of the weapons identified as assault weapons by advocates such as Senator Feinstein are no different from common hunting rifles in function and yet only bear a different cosmetic appearance. Lets take a look at a few examples:
Stag Arms AR-15
Sights: Rear Sight aperture and Front Sight Post (Scope is attachable)
Fire Rate: Semi-Auto (One Shot per trigger pull)
Available to civilians
Now if you are an avid gun enthusiast you will not need to be educated on the minor differences between the caliber of the rounds, but for full understanding I recommend visiting the link listed above. That considered, the only real difference behind these two weapons is their cosmetic appearance. So what makes the first weapon an assault weapon? The simple answer is it looks tactical or in other words similar to weapons used in combat; however, the weapons used by myself and others in the military are gravely different from the AR-15 above. This is because the M16-A4 and M4 serviced in the US Military are generally fielded with a burst selector switch. This switch allows you to place the weapon either on safe, semi-automatic, or three round burst. The three round burst allows you to fire three rounds in rapid succession with one trigger pull. Also in rare cases these items are fielded with a full-auto option, but this is rarely utilized as it serves little to no purpose. Full Automatic is limited to suppression and utilized by machine gunners.
Caliber: 5.56 NATO
Fire Rate: Semi-Auto, Burst, Full Auto
Only available to Law Enforcement/Military
So when looking at pure facts based of the actual specifications it is easy to see that “assault weapons” are already banned in the US and that gun control advocates actually want to ban scary looking weapons that are painted black. How is this viewpoint even respected?
I will not waste much time on the magazine capacity argument as any one who has shot a weapon regularly knows that a standard reload of a magazine takes so little time that it makes hardly any difference in a shooting situation. I will use this video of a fellow Devil Dog firing a magazine with only TWO rounds in it then speed reloading. I will let this warrior make the argument for me.
Point Made! Next Argument
Now this last argument utilized by anti-gun advocates gets under my skin more than all others. Gun Control lobbyists and advocates claim that more guns means more violence. The audacity of these people makes me curious as to what statistics or logic for that matter lead them to this conclusion. There is absolutely no evidence provided to shows a positive correlation between in an increase legal gun ownership and an increase in violence and violent crime. Don’t take my word for it. Visit either the FBI’s website that posts crime statistic and form your own conclusion or here’s a reposting of a great video posted by Amidst The Noise.
I mean lets face just because I give a hundred people hammers and nails that doesn’t mean I now have a hundred carpenters. The tool does not define the wielder, the wielder defines the tool.
Whether you are pro or anti gun, please chime in with your thoughts, comments, and concerns.