To Gun Control or Not to Gun Control

That is the Question

Since the days of Adam and Eve, or at least the days of Cain and Able, there has been a need of weaponry of some sort. Humans have used weapons for offense, defense, and for the providing of food for one’s family. But are weapons really required? If anything, what should our leaders do about the problem of gun violence (or any violence) in our communities?

The 2nd amendment reads as follows: “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.” While I do not wish to make this a discussion on the 2nd amendment and argue about militias and what the founders meant or didn’t mean (though it states ‘the right of the PEOPLE…’), I do want to talk about the word ‘Arms’. In Noah Webster’s 1828 Dictionary, the word ‘ARMS’ has a number of definitions. The first definition is, “Weapons of offense, or armor for defense and protection of the body.” The fourth definition states, “In law, arms are any thing which a man takes in his hand in anger, to strike or assault another.” When Cain “rose up and slew” his brother Able, he did so with ‘Arms’. Perhaps had Able realized murder was a thing, he too would have had ‘Arms’ to defend himself. Rocks, clubs, swords, shields, spears, knives, helmets, bows/arrows, slings, breastplates, baseball bats, and yes, firearms, are a small sampling of ‘Arms’.

Cain may have been the world’s first bully, but we have since had no shortage of them. We have bullies in elementary school that pick on others smaller or those less capable of defending themselves. We have bullies on the streets robbing, raping and murdering. We have bullies in business taking financial advantage of others. We have bullies within our own government, and we have bullies leading foreign nations. The right to defend oneself, one’s family, one’s property, and one’s freedom, should never be infringed (barring a couple very rare instances). How many murders and/or physical assaults happen every day? Police rarely can save you when a bully busts down your door, or walks into a store intent on causing harm. The police simply cannot be everywhere, nor would we want them to be. How many nations no longer exist because their country’s military did not have sufficient ‘Arms’ to fight a hostile nation? One of my favorite movie scenes from Raiders of the Lost Ark, is where Indy gets challenged by a large and skilled swordsman, Indy simply draws his firearm and kills the guy. While the scene is hilarious at the movies, it isn’t in real life. Nobody wants to be the one with the knife at the gunfight. Throughout history, conquering nations have generally always had better arms.

Moral decay grows to new heights annually. Crime is up, murder is up, adultery is up, child abuse is up. You name the bad, it most likely is up. It is tough. Law abiding citizens want law and order. So how do we govern the ungovernable? That is the question we should be trying to answer. Sadly, our “leaders” are seeking more ways to govern the law abiding citizen. The “Thou shalt not kill” law has been around since the beginning, and yet it keeps happening. And guess what, it will continue happening. Bullies are not going away; they especially will not go away just because our leaders make it more difficult for the law abiding citizen to bear arms. Doing so is more like an invitation for the bully to ramp up his/her efforts! If we want to slow down gun violence, we should be concentrating efforts on the importance of family and education. We should focus on helping the poor lift themselves out of poverty. We should be concentrating on returning to God. No question, our government should not do anything that pertains to any specific religion, but it should recommend its people to a moral and religious life.

In 1789, John Adams stated, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people, it is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Is the problem with the Constitution or is the problem with the “we the people”? There can be no freedom if there is no virtue. Sadly, the greatest (by far) governmental document and system, the Constitution of the United States, is proving Adams correct – it is wholly inadequate to the government of the immoral and irreligious.

Our “leaders” at this very time have dug in their heels to “correct” the problem of declining virtue and morality, by infringing on the rights of men and women that still have morals and virtue. They seek to create rights where rights do not and should not exist, while erasing portions of the most basic of rights, those of defense. They seek red flag laws, which can strip a person of firearms without a trial, and without being able to face ones accuser. These worthless jackwagens want to bribe the states with money to assist in the creation of these laws. If a grumpy neighbor, an ex-spouse, a political opponent, etc simply makes a claim to law enforcement that you said something “dangerous”, the cops can show up and take your guns… and then you get to spend time and money fighting to get them back (and hope you don’t need them in the meantime).

Our legislators want to restrict the number and type of guns getting into the hands of 18-20 year-olds. We are told their brains are not fully developed, and that guns in the hands of young adults simply poses too great a risk. Seriously? I get it. If you want to tell me that the average 18 year-old today is not as responsible as the average 18 year-old was thirty years ago, I would agree… much the same I would say 18 year-olds thirty years ago were not as responsible as 18 year-olds were sixty years ago. The failure is with parents, schools, and government. The biology of 18 year-olds hasn’t changed (well maybe it has with nothing but processed foods, sugar for days, and big pharma pushing pills for everything). These are the same people telling us that children should be able to pick their gender. So a 20 year-old isn’t responsible enough defend him/herself, but should be able to have gender reassignment surgery as a teenager? We are sorry son/daughter, we can put a gun in your hand and send you to kill people on the other side of the world, but we cannot trust you to defend yourself. An amendment was offered on this current gun legislation bill that would change the minimum draft age for the military to 21, but the democrats voted that amendment down. Leave it to a morally corrupt government to put firearms in the hands of our young people for offensive killing, while restricting firearms for those same young people for defensive purposes. You can kill who we say you can kill. Heck, these same people believe 16 year-olds should be able to vote.

HR 1, or the “For the People Act of 2021” was (and is) trying get 16 year-olds the vote. An amendment to HR 1 that would give the young the vote failed to pass; but you can thank the republicans for its failure. The majority of democrats voted in favor of giving 16 year-olds the vote (125 votes for and 93 votes against). The very same people telling us a 20 year-old isn’t responsible enough or mentally stable enough to have a gun, should be voting and voting five years prior to gun ownership. US Representative (democrat) Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts stated, “A sixteen-year-old in 2021 possesses a wisdom and a maturity that comes from 2021 challenges, 2021 hardships, and 2021 threats. Now is the time for us to demonstrate the courage that matches the challenges of the modern-day sixteen- and seventeen-year-old.” Ms Pressley wants 16 year-olds to vote, but doesn’t want 20 year-olds to have a gun. Still in the proposed legislation is requiring all states to allow 16-17 year-olds to register to vote. So if states were to have to register youngsters to vote (in preparation for when they are 18), how does a state keep them from voting if you cannot require IDs?

They are trying to ban “ghost guns”, or homemade guns. Really what they are trying to do is gain control. They want you spending money and taxes on everything. Heaven for bid, a machinist makes his/her own firearm. Mankind has been making his/her own weapons since the dawn of time. No question, the making of guns has gotten easier with the advent of 3D printers, but the guns are plastic. While some of the firearm can be plastic, there is much that still must be metal. Those parts need to be purchased or manufactured with CNC machines. While criminals can definitely make some parts, those parts will not last long; and this is more of a novelty. I know people that make these because they feel it is cool to make as many parts as possible for a firearm, and they can make each part a different color. We also have “80% lowers” that can legally be manufactured and sold to anybody. A “lower” receiver (part of a firearm) is the part the government requires to be serialized. An 80% lower (meaning less than 80% of the lower has been machined or completed, does not require a serial number. So a bad guy can legally purchase an 80% lower, and then finish milling it him/herself or find someone else to. The 80% rule was a byproduct of government intervention. In 1968, the government passed the Gun Control Act, and defined a firearm as having certain traits. So John Q Public very quickly realizes they can make a product that is outside of said definition. Hence “ghost guns”. The reality is if it is illegal for an individual to have a gun, it is illegal for him to make a gun. This is just one more law he/she is going to break. Of course if one is willing to murder and commit crime, he/she is probably willing to buy or make a gun illegally. I can legally make a sword, bows/arrows, even cannons. I can legally make an airplane in my garage and fly it. We have the God given right (and even the legal right) to make most anything we want… except firearms. That you can’t do if these bozos get their way.

Part of this proposed gun bill is to require “safe storage” of all firearms at home. The idea is to decrease gun accidents in the hands of small children. Most gun owners are very careful, but obviously not all are, and bad things do still happen to the responsible. The thought of me having to give criminals extra time after they break into my home in the middle of the night, by now having to go to a gun safe, and open it, retrieve a firearm before stopping them from harming myself or my family is sickening. I am confident criminals everywhere would vote for these ne’er-do-wells if they still had the right to vote (I’m sure some are voting).

They want to make bump stocks illegal by law, rather than just ATF rules (given to us by the Trump administration. This sprang from the Vegas shooting as a bump stock was found in the room. The outcry of course commenced, and republican lawmakers showed their cowardice. They didn’t want to vote for a bill making bump stocks illegal, so they asked Trump to ban them. Despite knowing that all legislative powers are with Congress, they chose to ask a President to “legislate” from the executive branch. The republican legislators knew their voting to assault the 2nd amendment would not be taken lightly come election time, so they chose to pass the buck. Trump, with his lack of testicular fortitude, chose to instruct the ATF to do something unconstitutional, and to do it in an unconstitutional way. I find the whole bump stock thing kind of insane. Bump stocks are nothing more than a fun “toy”. It is an apparatus put on as the stock of a rifle, that kind of allows it to mimic a fully automatic firearm (which the government made illegal eons ago except for the rich). They do not work super well (though with practice I am sure it can get better; but it is fun. Blasting 30 rounds down range in a matter of a couple seconds is rush and a half… but that is all it is. Shooting a firearm mimicking automatic mode with a bump stock is not accurate at all. It is a fun experience and that is all. No intelligent person (not that most criminals are intelligent) would have a bump stock on to commit murder.

Congress wants to ban “high capacity” magazines for you and me. The military and law enforcement can still have them. The criminals will definitely still have them, so it will just be the law abiding citizen that is restricted. There is talk of 10 rounds and talk of 15 round maximums. Most handguns (other than revolvers) hold more rounds than 10. Many everyday carry handguns hold 15, 17, and 20 rounds. While many may think 10 rounds is enough, and it may very well be, sometimes. The situation dictates the number of rounds needed. First, how many perpetrators are there? Are we talking just one bad guy, or are there three or four? Is the defensive person using a smaller caliber handgun or a larger caliber handgun? Oftentimes people can be shot multiple times before falling. Is the bad guy hopped up on drugs, which can have the affect of turning someone into “super human” for a few seconds. Firing a weapon in a high stress situation can yield misses, even from trained law enforcement officers. Will banning high capacity magazines stop bad guys from doing bad things? Nope. One of the shooters at Columbine had only 10 round magazines. He had thirteen of those 10 round magazines, totaling 130 rounds. All those magazines would be completely legal by the proposed legislation. The Virginia Tech shooter had 17 magazines on his person, most all of which were 10 round magazines. If an evil person wants to do evil things (which is what this is), the evil person will find a way to do evil things.

The vilifying of the AR-15 has got to stop. Is it a fun rifle to shoot? Yes, 100%. Is it a “weapon of war”? Yes and no (and who cares if it is). It is the same basic firearm that is used in the military (for the time being) with a really big exception, it is not fully automatic. Having said that, the vast majority of military personnel use the weapon more while it is NOT in full auto mode. Why? Because it is not accurate, it is a waste of ammo, and one can find him/herself with no rounds in the firearm while still having an enemy with a gun. Best option is firing one round at a time. Does an AR-15 look scary? Not to me, but I guess that is in the eye of the beholder. The round is on the smaller side for a rifle. Please note the chart below – the AR-15 shoots the 223 round (5th from the left). It does travel at much faster rate of speed than a pistol, which can cause the bullet to go straight through a human as opposed to bouncing around a bit. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to be shot by an AR-15, but I don’t want to get shot by anything. The stopping power of the AR-15 doesn’t compare well with many other caliber rifles. The ability to have a magazine that holds 20 or 30 rounds is definitely an advantage militarily, but the only reason that is possible/realistic is because the round is on the smaller side. Try a 30 round magazine for a 338 round – yikes! That would be bulky and way too heavy. Obviously the level of evil it takes to go into a school and kill children is pretty much unmatched. I have never fully understood why some that did these heinous crimes did so with an AR-15. A bad guy could carry many, many more magazines and many, many more rounds with a handgun than with a rifle; and said bad guy can reload a new magazine in a handgun faster than he/she can with an AR (takes both hands to aim and fire a rifle). Evil is evil. I believe the current figures show about 3% of the firearm crimes use a long gun / rifle. But the media has the American public believing that nearly all crime comes with a shiny black AR (which stands for Armalite Rifle by the way).

As our overpaid legislators continue to haggle over what level of rights forfeiture we commoners will have to abide by, I must share one of the proposed “exceptions” that was rejected by the democrats (who are more than happy to have firearms themselves, and to be protected by professionals with firearms). As the left is pushing for a bump in age to 21 while not being willing to bump up the age for the military draft to 21, an exception was proposed to at least allow a 20 year old wife and mother of an active serviceman to be able to protect herself and her child(ren) while her husband was away at war (and vise versa). That proposed exception was also denied.

The right to bear ‘Arms’ is the God-given right to defend oneself. It is the right to use whatever power or instrument is needed. I pray to God I never have to shed the blood of my fellow man. But having said that, the choice to be a victim of evil or to defend myself and my family from evil, is my choice. It is not my neighbor’s choice. It is not the local police department’s choice. It sure as heck is not some “do as I say and not as I do” yellowbellied DC jackwagen’s choice. As a citizen of this great land, and as a believer and supporter of the Constitution of the United States, I will defend the Constitution, this land, my freedom, and your freedom, until the good Lord calls me home. That defense will be from enemies foreign and domestic – and the domestic ones are the bigger worry.