I don’t know about all of you, but I love a good debate. Especially ones that involve our gun rights. Staying true to my character, when I see a gun post come across my Facebook page, I take notice. And it doesn’t really matter which side of the argument the post is coming from because there will always be someone to argue the opposing view.
Recently one such post popped up on my feed. It was a link to an article about teachers getting carry permits in Texas…..for free. Ya just gotta love it. The link was posted by a pro-gun friend of mine, but one of the first comments I noticed went something like this:
“More guns is not the answer. How about we take more guns off the street and make it more difficult for criminals to get them?”.
YES!! My brain went wild in anticipation of the coming dialogue that I was about to embark on. I was stoked, because, well, I love it when gun grabbers are so choked by facts that they cannot even talk.
Now of course this gentleman’s intentions are true. I don’t question that, so I didn’t jump down his throat right away. I needed to test the waters a little and see what he was really all about.
After a nice little volley, (Just enough to feel confident he was in fact a gun-grabber) I posed a simple question: What would you do to stop crime while not infringing on the rights of others? Now I know that few liberals will ever give a straight answer to any question. And this guy was no different. It took more than 30 exchanges, with repeated red herrings and straw-man arguments to finally get an answer. The following quote was his response.
“I would change the law to prevent any private sales. Anyone selling a gun or buying a gun would have to be registered. I would eliminate any war like weapons. I care much more about other components of our constitution.”
Finally, we’re getting somewhere. And you know you have to admit, it’s his honest answer, and I respect it. And since I think we can all agree that the goal is to reduce gun crime, let’s just see how this proposal would accomplish that, if at all. Now I know that I am preaching to the choir here. Most of you already know all this stuff. For those of you that do, a refresher will never hurt. For those of you who don’t, learn it, because the gun grabbers are coming. And they aren’t going to stop.
Eliminate private sales. – I will assume that the private sales he is referring to are the already illegal transactions that go on behind closed doors in every major city in America, on an almost daily basis. The ones conducted by people who are convicted criminals already. I wonder if he is aware that almost 75% of gun crime is committed by convicted felons and repeat offenders? The truth is that the majority of gun crime does not stem from private transactions by law abiding citizens, but from burglaries where guns were stolen. In those situations, the elimination of private sales would have no effect.
But let’s look at the big shootings like Sandy Hook and the Colorado theater, etc. Every one of the guns used in those crimes were lawfully purchased through FFL dealers. Not private sales. It’s anecdotal for sure, but the point is that eliminating private sales will do nothing to eliminate crime. Those inner city transactions are going to continue.
One other minor point. Private sales of guns have been around forever. Yet, these mass shootings are a fairly recent phenomenon. Pretty sure it has nothing to do with private sales. If Myth Busters did a show on the myth of private sales relating to crime…..
Now let’s take a look at the second part of my friends suggestions for reducing crime. He is an advocate for complete gun registration. WHAT IS GUN REGISTRATION? It’s a giant list naming all of the owners with all of the guns they own and any other details seen necessary to catalogue every gun in the country. I am not going to go into a lot of detail about how registration leads to confiscation, but I do want to highlight just a few. China, Cuba, Russia, Nazi Germany, Australia, UK, Canada (They confiscate at the death of the owner), Bermuda, Greece, Georgia (Country not State) and Ireland. Okay that’s more than a few, so shoot me.
There are even some minor cases of registration leading to confiscation right here in our own back yard. California, New York and Illinois all had registration that led to confiscation. And let’s not forget the confiscation by Louisiana officials in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina. Suffice to say that there is not a single example in all of modern history that tyranny did not start with registration then followed by confiscation. Not one. And not a single case of full registration (without tyranny and oppression) that did not lead to confiscation. Oh sure, one could site some current examples of how that is not the case, but I would argue that they are still a work in progress and we have yet to see the end result since we are still living in the present.
Previously noted instances give us the benefit of historical context and an outside-in/bird’s-eye type point of view. While current examples cited can be difficult to see them for what they are because these things are happening in our back yard.
Side note: While I’m at it, I want to mention the warrantless searches performed by LEO’s in Boston last week. Are those Constitutional violations any different than taking guns from people who only want to protect themselves?
But confiscation isn’t supposed to really be the point of the argument is it? Our goal is to reduce crime. Well? Those criminals in the cities (we talked about last week) aren’t going to comply. They’re gonna keep doing what they’re doing. And it won’t stop them from breaking into a home where there is a registered weapon, stealing it, and then using it to kill someone. Is anyone really dumb enough to think Adam Lanza would have gone back to playing MW3 if he had found a registration form next to his mothers guns? The answer is, DUH!
In parts one and two, we talked about how my friend would eliminate private sales and have full registration on all guns. Today we look at his suggestion that we eliminate any “war like” weapon. I will address the term “war like”, with the assumption that he is referring to the scary “assault rifle”, the most common of which is the AR-15. But before I do….a few more facts. I know facts suck, but they kinda help us determine a logical outcome and foster a path to real success. First of all, the US Supreme Court has determined that it is that very group of weapon (war like) that are protected by the 2nd amendment (US v Miller 1939). Secondly, at one point in history, ALL types of guns have been used in war.
But again, that does not address the issue of reducing crime. So, would eliminating “war like” weapons serve to reduce crime? Well let’s look at which guns are actually used in crime. The most common caliber used in crime is the .38. And you know how many “war like” weapons come in that caliber? ZERO! Oh there might be some ops guy that carries a .38 on his ankle or inside his body armor as a back-up, but that hardly qualifies it as a “war like” weapon.
In fact, the top 10 calibers used in crimes are not even calibers that are that common in the military anyway. The 9mm is used as a sidearm, but not as often. And the caliber used the most by the military (5.56 for the AR/M16) doesn’t even hit the top 20 for use in crimes. In fact there is not a single rifle (Of ANY caliber) in the top ten. And the scary “assault rifle” accounts for less than 2% of all gun crime.
I think it’s safe to say that, while good intentioned, these proposals would do NOTHING to stop or even reduce the level of gun crime. Even eliminating “war like” weapons would just mean that the bad guy will just use a different gun. Again I have to ask, does anyone to think that if the AR had not been available to the most recent shooters, that they would have just thrown their hands in the air and stayed at home? “Darn I can’t commit this mass shooting because I don’t have an AR!” Just like with registration, the answer is painfully obvious.
The Virginia Tech shooter used handguns and killed 32 while wounding another 17. That’s more than ANY other shooting in American history. Unless of course you include ones perpetrated by the government like the one at wounded knee. Which coincidentally was done after the military disarmed the victims. Where was the second highest death toll? Sandy Hook. And the only one at the top to have actually used an AR-15 style rifle in the killings. How about the 3rd highest? Killeen Texas at 24. And again, handgun!!! Shall I continue? MythBusters strikes again.
From the now defunct Haus of Guns.