Why is the President exploiting the murder of children for a political goal that won’t protect children?

I’ve watched the President’s position “evolve” from “I’m going to  do something on gun control” to “Biden’s going to lead a blue ribbon commission on gun control” to (today) “it’s up to congress to act.” What this means is it is highly unlikely (but not impossible) there’s going to be an assault weapons ban.

But in any case … isn’t it kind of despicable the President and anti-gun groups are using this tragedy to try and ban a single class of weapons, which is not a solution to mass murder, but just one stop on their political goal of destroying the 2nd amendment? Will it make him feel better if the next shooter uses pistols like Cho at VT? Or a shotgun (and other guns) like the columbine killers? Or for that matter a bolt action rifle like Charles Whitman on a Texas tower?

If you want to argue gun control as a way to stop mass shootings you need to have the courage to fight for something that would actually make a difference, like a total ban on guns and a turn in of all existing guns. Which absolutely won’t happen without a change in the constitution and a . . . → Read More: Why is the President exploiting the murder of children for a political goal that won’t protect children?

A Gun Guy Does Some Soul Searching After the Sandy Hook School Massacre

It’s funny how a single image can affect you more profoundly than a thousand others. When I see the collage of the faces of all those beautiful children murdered in the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre it’s just too much; it’s like trying to drink pain from a firehose. That picture could be of my first grader’s class, children whom I know by name and see regularly. My brain can’t conceive of all of them gone from something so … terrible? Horrible? Unthinkable? My thesaurus fails me. There’s no adequate word in the English language for so many children savagely murdered.

But then I see a picture of a father walking along the sidewalk, head low, to attend his child’s funeral. And suddenly that’s me. Crushed and dazed and about to see the body of my six year old lying in a casket. Whom just days before I had kissed on the cheek and dropped off at school. And I find myself with tears in my eyes. And my heart so full of pain I can barely stand it.

With 300 million people what can we do to keep the insane and hateful from murdering innocents? Should we make the . . . → Read More: A Gun Guy Does Some Soul Searching After the Sandy Hook School Massacre

AR-15s at Walmart! Is there any question that black rifles are now the norm?


AR-15s at Wal Mart

I was doing some late night shopping at a nearby Walmart in Littleton, Colorado, and what did I find? Several sporting type “black” semi-automatic rifles in the rifle rack. Nicely priced, too. I’ve seen plenty of .22LR semi-auto rifles at Wal Mart, but here are some .223 AR-15′s in both carbine and hunting configuration. One even has a normal capacity (30 round) magazine and telescoping stock — both nice features.

I plan on buying another rifle this summer, my daughter’s first (probably a Ruger 10-22) and Walmart will now be on my A-list of possible stores to purchase it from.

I don’t know if Walmart went through with its plan from a while back to video tape all gun purchases and etc., but I’m not as concerned about that as I am about making sure that semi-automatic modern rifles stay in the mainstream. And “mainstream” and “common use” (the latter a phrase referenced by the Heller Supreme Court case) means Walmart to most of America.

#gallery-1 { margin: auto; } #gallery-1 .gallery-item { float: left; margin-top: 10px; text-align: center; width: 33%; } #gallery-1 img { border: 2px solid #cfcfcf; } #gallery-1 .gallery-caption { margin-left: 0; . . . → Read More: AR-15s at Walmart! Is there any question that black rifles are now the norm?

An anti-gunner wonders why we didn’t automatically limit the guns we would buy after the Tucson murders

Anti gun blogger Japete wonders why the 100 million or so gun owner’s in this country don’t each accept responsibility for the mass murders of a crazy kid did in Tucson, and limit the kinds of guns they will buy or own.

Here is my response:

I bought a 30 round magazine for my pistol at the gun show last weekend. I’ve never wanted one in the past, but I bought it because I do think they’re going to get at least temporarily scarce because of the drumbeat of a few politicians and many news organizations for a ban on them (I seriously doubt that ban will happen, but I don’t have a crystal ball).

But how did I do anything wrong by buying that mag? Why should I feel bad? It doesn’t matter whether I buy a pistol, a machine gun, a grenade launcher or a tank … they are no danger to anyone else. I’m not a murderer, and it won’t affect what happened in Tucson or whatever WILL happen in the next place some freak goes off the deep end.

So why should I limit what I allow myself to own because of what someone else did? . . . → Read More: An anti-gunner wonders why we didn’t automatically limit the guns we would buy after the Tucson murders

How to approach gun owners who don’t understand the politics of gun control (the 2nd amendment “but heads”)

How many gun owners and politicians do you know who say they support the second amendment, then caveat that statement with …

… but I don’t think that means you should be able to own an assault rifle, I’ve never wanted one. … but that doesn’t mean you can carry a gun around with you. … but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t have to register it. … but nobody needs more than one gun a month. … but it’s OK for big cities to restrict the right. … but National Parks should be strictly offlimits. … but {ad nauseum}

On this blog I’ve given arguments against gun registration, “Assault Weapon” bans, the anti-gun stance of some mainstream Christian churches, and other self-righteous but logically challenged anti-gun rhetoric. Honestly, the anti-gun groups have little but knee-jerk fear and paranoia to draw upon and their bogus studies and proposed laws are easily debated.

But the anti-gun groups have been successful anyway, because they’ve created so much background noise, eagerly picked up on by the Main Stream Media, that gun owners who don’t pay attention to gun politics — the average Joe/Joanne who owns a firearm for hunting or self defense but for . . . → Read More: How to approach gun owners who don’t understand the politics of gun control (the 2nd amendment “but heads”)

Eliminate every event with any risk whatsoever, and what’s left?

A fun activity can turn tragic in a heartbeat. In 2001, 8 young football players died of injuries sustained on the field. In 2006 100 children died in ATV accidents. Every year residential swimming pools are involved in 300 PRE SCHOOL and hundreds more school age child drownings. On October 27th a boy at a shooting event with his father lost control of the automatic weapon he was firing and died of an injury to the head — the only known fatality in all of the so called “machine gun” shoots that happen yearly in the US.

Adults, sometimes via legislation, have a duty to protect children. There are frequent rule changes for High School football to reduce injuries, many states require minors to wear helmets when riding ATV’s, swimming pools have zoning requirements for fences and protective covers, etc.

Intelligent people could debate the pros and cons of specific rules, but the bottom line is they are a measured response to the limited but inherent dangers of the activity that recognizes the enjoyment, traditions, and other benefits it provides. Because all Americans know that a life based strictly on avoiding and banning risks of any kind would not be . . . → Read More: Eliminate every event with any risk whatsoever, and what’s left?

The Butcher’s Bill – Non-gun mass murders:

For some some thoughts on the Sandy Hook school massacre from the father of a kindergarten aged child, please click here.

After every mass shooting anti-gun groups blame the availability of firearms and promote their standard list of gun laws whether relevant or not. But guns are just one tool of mass murder, not the most efficient tool, and NOT a motivation. i.e. no one suddenly realizes that they can legally buy a gun, and because of it decide to go to the mall and murder everyone they see.

The fact is that a murderer decides to commit murder and THEN chooses his tool from what is available. They often do choose a gun of one type or another, but if guns are not available there are many other effective weapons that are. And as can be seen below, the largest mass murders in every category were committed not with firearms, but with explosives.The main reason for this gruesome statistic is the same lesson learned by the armies of the world and the major terrorist groups; firearms are designed for personal defense, and ordinance (explosives) are many times more effective for attacking a large force or group of people.

. . . → Read More: The Butcher’s Bill – Non-gun mass murders:

.50 Caliber “Sniper” rifles – a fear looking for a rationalization

Anti-gun groups routinely blame mass murders on the availability of firearms, especially any particularly-evil-gun-du-jour (most recently the .50 BMG) they are trying to ban, and use mass murders to raise money and lobby for laws that would have been completely irrelevant to the event. And they are not above using a non-event to promote their cause, not even trying to find a causal relationship but simply feeding off of the fear and ignorance of a misinformed public.

Take, for instance, the terrorist plot that was nipped in the bud in NJ back in 2007, when a handful of wannabe Jihadists were arrested trying to buy fully automatic AK47’s and M16’s to murder soldiers at Fort Dix. They already had semi-automatic rifles (so called “Assault Weapons”) that the anti-gun groups continually try to ban (even though the 1994 – 2004 ban had no measurable effect on violence), but the terrorists knew the difference between a fully automatic assault weapon and a semi-automatic civilian variant and intelligently decided only fully automatic weapons would do the job (apparently they didn’t buy the anti-gun group hyperbole that puts civilian and military rifles in the same category).

This time current gun laws actually worked. The . . . → Read More: .50 Caliber “Sniper” rifles – a fear looking for a rationalization

The AHSA: The Brady Campaign in a Flannel Shirt

The American Hunters and Shooters Association (AHSA) has been labeled a sham pro-gun group by the NRA and about every other group that supports gun rights. But are they really? Or do they speak for the average hunter? How do their positions compare to the Brady Campaign and other anti-gun groups:

All are in favor of banning .50 caliber rifles (which they call “sniper” rifles or an “armor piercing” weapon depending upon mood and context):AHSA anti .50 caliber rifle page.Brady Campaign anti 50 caliber rifle pageFSA’s anti .50 caliber rifle pageBut what are the facts about this weapon? It is NOT realistically capable of taking down an aircraft, even on landing or takeoff. Imagine, if you will, launching a robin egg sized bullet moving at about 2,000 MPH from 500 yards away at a target moving at 150+ MPH. If you’re a terrorist group that has to spend time and resources getting your assailants into the US, you don’t waste them on a 1 in a million shot against an aircraft; there are many more effective ways to expend your jihadists.

All believe that all firearms transactions should be documented, and that non-dealer coordinated sales should be ended (the so . . . → Read More: The AHSA: The Brady Campaign in a Flannel Shirt

A school shooting in Finland. What does it say about OUR gun laws?

As a parent of two children who I drop off at school every day, with nothing but hope that a murderous madman won’t appear two minutes after I walk away, there is nothing more horrifying than reading about a school shooting. Such as this massacre in Finland.

But just as horrifying is the reaction of American anti-gun groups to such tragedies here in the US; groups which use these worst-of-all mass murders for political purposes to pass laws that have no relationship to what happened.

Immediately after the Virginia Tech massacre, for instance, the Brady Campaign asked for $32 (one dollar for each victim) to promote “sensible” gun laws. In a follow up email less than a week later, they defined those laws as:

The Brady Campaign is working nonstop to get the message out that there are solutions to gun violence. We can ban military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips that make it so easy to kill quickly . . . we can require Brady background checks for all gun sales, including at gun shows . . . we can stop large-volume gun sales that supply illegal gun traffickers. These are just some of the steps we can . . . → Read More: A school shooting in Finland. What does it say about OUR gun laws?