Yesterday this happened.
Since the last assault weapon’s ban expired…more than 350 people have been killed with assault weapons. More than 450 have been injured. We should be outraged…
I concur that any taking of innocent life is a terrible tragedy no matter how it occurs. Yet this foaming at the mouth by the gun control crowd to do something about “assault weapons” really isn’t justified when you simply examine the facts and stack them up against their rationale. What are the facts? I’m glad you asked, look no further than the FBI table on Expanded Homicide Data for 2011.
In 2011 there were 12,664 murders in which weapons were involved. It should be noted that theirs is a broad definition of weapons, considering some of the items which appear on the list.
Of those 12,664 murders…
-6,220 were committed using handguns
-323 were committed using rifles
-356 were committed using shotguns
-97 were committed using “other guns”
-1,694 were committed using knives
-496 were committed using blunt objects
-728 were committed using hands, feet, fists etc.
Let’s assume that all 323 of the murders committed using rifles were done with “assault weapons.” Of course we know this to be untrue since Sen. Feinstein stated that 350 people have been killed with “assault weapons” since the ban expired in 2004. Yet for simplicity’s sake let’s assume all 323 of those murders in 2011 were done with the spawn of Lucifer, forged in the pits of hell itself, the AR15.
In 2011 the population of the US was 310 million people. That means that your chance of being murdered by an “assault rifle” in 2011 was 0.000104%. As a matter of fact an individual was 19 times more likely to be murdered by a pistol, 5 times more likely to be murdered by a knife, 2 times more likely to be murdered by hands/feet/fists.
So where is this outrage coming from? They state that “assault weapons” are evil and need to be dealt with! Why I ask, because 323 people died at the wrong end of a rifle barrel in 2011? I’m not trying to be callous here, I’m trying to wrap my head around their rationale. 323 people in 2011 is terrible to hear about but if they (politicians) were so concerned about senseless deaths and wanted to hold news conferences maybe they should acknowledge:
-9,855 people die every year from drunk driving, 27 per day, 211 of those were children in 2010.
-1,825 children die every year from child abuse and neglect, 5 every day.
-2,500 people die every year from choking
-25,000 die every year from accidental falls
Right about now you might be burned out on statistics so I’ll wrap it up. Here’s a thought, why aren’t they going after all of the pistols which accounted for 6,220 deaths in 2011? Not that I support any such measure but I think you can see where I’m coming from. It simply doesn’t make sense. This push for an “assault weapons ban” is simply unfounded given the evidence. Mass shootings are indeed tragic and I acknowledge that but far more people die every year from other causes and you don’t hear a peep about that from the media. No 24/7 news coverage, no Piers Morgan on television stating that we simply must do something about all of those senseless choking or accidental fall related deaths. This agenda to paint “assault weapons” in a bad light is an affront to our legal right as law abiding citizens to own these guns. Our individual rights to own them are indeed guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment (read: shall not be infringed), and our sovereign rights trump that of the greater good.
Print 
PDF
8 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
ParaB
January 25, 2013 at 7:54 PM (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I love the “spawn of lucifer, foraged in hell itself”! That’s awesome. I’ve been saying the same thing. And what else, have you noticed that all AR’s are Bushmasters? Wow, what an ignorant society we live in. I ordered a Bushmaster t-shirt today. My wife asked why I would do that, I said for educational purposes.
PJ
January 25, 2013 at 9:29 PM (UTC -4) Link to this comment
All AR’s are Bushmasters, all Bushmasters use high capacity clips.
To
January 29, 2013 at 4:22 AM (UTC -4) Link to this comment
You said there at the that the media doesn’t say a peep about the other cause of death. I’d beg to differ on that. The death rate from DUI has plummeted since laws became more strict which is largely due to the massive attention it was given in the media in the 1980s.
PJ
January 29, 2013 at 7:38 AM (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Fair enough, but this isn’t the 1980′s. Have we reached a point then, where we have simply accepted that 27 people dying per day from drunk driving cannot be avoided and warrants no constant MSM coverage? Yet vilifying a certain style of rifle which, in the hands of deranged individuals, is responsible for 300 (ish) deaths (in a country of 300+ million people) since 2004 seems completely rational…
I think we both know the answer, it’s not about the body count but about the agenda. Thanks for your comment.
PJ
Semper Paratus
February 13, 2013 at 6:51 PM (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I agree that the hysteria over “assault weapons” (I’m not even sure I know what that means, but whatever) is vastly overblown. The big scary black gun, like your average AR-15 and variants thereof, has taken a lot of heat lately, not all of it deserved. I take kind of a middle of the road view of firearms. The 2nd Amendment has been interpreted to give the individual the right to bear arms, although this is a very recent development in constitutional jurisprudence – until recently there were no cases which applied the 2nd to the individual, but that’s where we are today and I accept that this view makes sense. The thing is, though, none of the individual rights conferred under the US Constitution are unlimited. All our liberties have limits, including the 2nd Amendment. No reasonable person would argue the 2nd gives an individual the right to possess a nuclear weapon, or a tank, or an artillery piece, and it goes even further than that. I don’t think even the NRA would argue that the 2nd gives the individual the right to own a fully automatic weapon (which truly is a weapon of war or what I would call an assault weapon). But, does the 2nd give the individual the right to own an AR-15 semi-automatic? The answer depends on whether public safety concerns rise to the level where they should prevail over the constitutional liberty. This has always been the analysis when it comes to constitutional rights. The same analysis goes with respect to large capacity magazines. This is the discussion I believe we should be having. Honestly, I fail to see the difference between a Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle and an AR-15, yet the Feinstein Assault Weapons ban proposal would eliminate the AR-15, but would leave the Mini 14 alone even though the only true difference between the two weapons is essentially cosmetic. We should not be legislating away constitutional rights based on cosmetics. Neither, however, should we protect something based on the convenience of the user. What I refer to here is whether the 2nd should protect the possession of a 30 round magazine. The only practical difference between a 30 round mag and a 5 round mag is one of convenience. One requires the user to stop firing to reload more frequently. Should the 2nd protect volume of fire? Volume of fire is of particular concern in a mass shooting situation like Aurora or Sandy Hook. I’m not so sure on this one. Don’t get me wrong, I want to hang onto my higher capacity magazines, but I’m not prepared to say we are going to move into a police state if they are outlawed. Just because we don’t like something, or don’t agree with it doesn’t make it unconstitutional. Slave owners hated emancipation. It hit them very hard economically. It wiped out a great deal of material wealth for them. It took a condition which was part of the liberty they were accustomed to and crushed it to dust. Yet that right, guaranteed under the constitution, was eliminated, rightly so, and we remained a free country and liberty did not die. Neither will it die, I believe, if they outlaw high capacity magazines.
PJ
February 15, 2013 at 7:52 AM (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SP
Very well written, thanks for taking the time to share that information. I would argue that we should be allowed to own fully automatic rifles (and we can) and silencers, and 50 caliber sniper rifles et al. Tanks and artillery pieces? Maybe that’s the compromise of which you speak. I see no room for compromise when it comes to making concessions with reference to semi-automatic firearms, 30 round magazines and the like. Zero, none, nada.
Rick
March 21, 2013 at 4:12 PM (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Eugene Stoner invited the AR back in 1957. In 1963 the US Govt adapted this weapons platform for military use. But it was the media and politicians who coin the AR an assault weapon. Mr Stoner was working for a company called Fairchild Armalite Corp. And the AR was named after Armalite, hence called Armalite Rifle. The military named it M-16. Armalite eventualy sold the AR rights to Colt and thats the basic history of how the AR became what it’s known as today. Currently this gun scare is exactly what it is…a scare. Though everytime we get democrats in office or as a majority we go thru this crap. I know friends in the gun industry and they said….now that theirs a slim to NO chance of the ban succeeding in either chamber of congress. The are back to full swing in manufacturing. And that by sept 2013. supplies should be back to normal before this scare subsequently occurred. What’s sad and I bet we’ll see this….once the dust settles and things settle down. You will see a huge influx of gun new in the box for private sale. Because so many people who didnt have a gun rush to buy one thinking they might not be able to. Many werent even sure they wanted a gun but thought what if i needed one or wanted one and couldnt get it. So I better get it now. More than likely it was mostly liberals doing this gun grabbing. People like me who have our guns already were more inclined to stock up on ammo. Before this crap happen I paid less than 400 bucks for lake city ammo (5.56) for a 1000 rds. Now it’s averaging about a $1 a round. But ammo will come down too. In fact I am seeing more magazines that hold 30 rds out there at $50 for a pmag and $30 for lancer mags. Point is a few mths ago those were going for $100 if they could be found. Just relax and be patient and by sept we should see items back in stock in adundance and at the cost prior to Sandy Hook. God Bless you all, and was refreshiing to see people like us keep our cools . Whereas, the libs were pretty vocal and had no real argument to debate us with.
PJ
March 21, 2013 at 6:57 PM (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Rick,
I too think prices will somewhat stabilize by this summer/fall. Like you said NIB sales will be at an all time high and that is one of the things that could potentially inhibit prices returning back to normal. Many people rushed out to buy, I suspect quite a few on credit, and paid ridiculous prices for guns and ammunition. You and I know a Colt LE6920 is worth around $1000, but johnny-come-late who paid $3500 on his Visa will not be so anxious to let it go for that price. Same applies to ammunition and mag purchases, and subsequent resales.
If this isn’t a learning point I don’t know what is. This is why you must maintain an adequate stock of everything so that when the hype hits you can weather the storm. Really all I did was reduce my shooting some, but that will pick back up when the weather gets warmer.