You can gain some perspective on some statements made here from my Aurora post found here: http://ace38film.blogspot.com/2012/07/non-film-post-actual-difference-or.html.
I wish to thank my friend, published writer Michelle Macfarlane for her assistance in the editing and wording of this post. Without her assistance, you wouldnt' be reading this right now.
I grieve and ache for the families who have suffered one of the most horrific acts I have seen in my lifetime, but there are ways to honor their memories and try to prevent this from happening again without making scapegoats and pushing personal political agendas. More laws wont stop this, it will only inconvenience those of us who follow them.
My love to the people of Newtown, Connecticut. You'll Never Walk Alone. The nation is with you.
27 lives needlessly lost, 20 of them belonged to beautiful
children between the age of 5-7.
Innocence at its most pure, a moment of pure evil ending their purity
and scarring many others for life.
Almost immediately, the left began screaming for gun control
laws. Connecticut has some of the most
stringent gun laws in the nation, and yet this act occurred. We’re going to look at cold, hard facts here,
not emotion. Emotion is the response of
the weak and it takes thought and strength to deal with issues to find real
solutions.
FACT: CONNECTICUT HAS
VERY DEMANDING GUN LAWS. All these
weapons were legally owned and registered to the shooters mother. We do not know how she stored them, but as
the madman was her own son, we can safely assume that they were lying around or
under lock and key. He knew what to do to attain them. None of us knew how they were stored in that
house and it’s foolish to assume we do.
FACT: ADDITIONAL LAWS
WOULD NOT HAVE PREVENTED THIS CRIME. The
shooter committed the following offenses:
1. Murder: (his mother, 6 adults in the school, 20
children in the school)
2. Attempted
murder: (anyone wounded in the assault who survived)
3. Breaking
and entering: (he bypassed the school security system by breaking a window to
gain access)
4. Theft:
(his mothers weapons and her vehicle)
5. Bringing
a gun onto school campus
6. Shooting
with intent to kill
7. Using
a firearm in the commission of a felony
8. Damage
to public property
And possibly others that they
could find, perhaps murder of a government employee among others, and yet none
of these laws were of any concern to the shooter, nor were they in previous
shootings at Portland, Littleton, Ft. Gibson, etc.
FACT: SHOOTER ATTEMPTED TO BUY A RIFLE IN THE DAYS
LEADING TO THE SHOOTING. It is my belief
that this shooter simply wanted to avenge some perceived wrong at the school
with this attempt. The murder of his
mother was simply because the laws already in the books prevented him from
attaining his own weapon and he needed them to do this cowardly act. The laws you pushed for worked and he did it
anyway.
FACT: THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS TO PROVIDE THE
CITIZENRY ACCESS TO WEAPONS TO PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM THE GOVERNMENT. That is why there is no specifics on what we
can and cannot have access to. Those
laws came in later and have been upheld as reasonable. Many on the left scream “Well they didn’t
mean high powered assault weapons, they meant muskets.” Show me where it says that. It doesn’t- it means with whatever weapons
are available. In an age of swords and
shields, bows and arrows, the muskets were the “high powered assault weapon” of
their day. You’d be a fool to think they
weren’t anticipating the future technology as well. You
don’t see “unless it’s a really fast gun we cant even conceive of”. They said the right of the people to keep and
bear arms shall not be infringed.
“But what about our right to
liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiivvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvve??”
the liberals scream: Well, you have no
right to live. Not in today’s
America. Why do I say that? We live in a nation where you can terminate
human life in the name of choice.
Regardless of how you feel about it (and I don’t give a damn, so keep it
to yourself), the fact is abortion occurs on a fertilized egg. Whether you feel life begins at conception or
at some future point (and again, I DON’T CARE), the fact is that is a life
being stopped from continuing. It’s not
like condoms, IUD’s, spermicides and the like which prevents fertilization. The plain and simple medical fact is that a
life is being terminated. Furthermore,
no matter what type of contraception is used, or if you use none at all, there
is no guarantee the woman will not become pregnant . So what do we do? Choice…..you argue in favor of it every day,
so the extension of the argument is logical.
Furthermore, a right is something you have, not something that’s
given. If the government starts making
our choices regarding the Second Amendment, how long until someone decides he
doesn’t like political dissent and starts coming up with laws to prevent
that? “Well, the First Amendment protects
such speech” the liberals respond. And
they make my point perfectly. First
Amendment protects our political speech, Second Amendment protects our
individual security. You willingly gave
up your right to live in the name of choice.
You don’t even realize you’re giving up your First Amendment rights in
the name of hate crime laws. Sure, those
who abuse others due to race are ignorant and pitiful, but are their biases
really a crime? It’s now a crime to be
stupid?
“Well, these high powered rifles
are only to kill….they’re for the military…..they just kill people”…..No,
they don’t. People kill.
The gun is merely a tool. I can
kill you with a hammer just as easily.
22 kids and an elderly woman were stabbed in a China school the same day
the Newtown horror occurred. Not to
mention the .223 Remington round fired by commercially available AR-15 rifles
(and its extended family) is a somewhat different round than the military
5.56MM when actual powder charges and ballistics are taken into account. You can safely fire .223 in a rifle chambered
for 5.56MM NATO (which the .223 is a lower power round), but firing 5.56MM NATO
could likely damage a .223 rifle and possibly the shooter. The .223 gained popularity as a varmint
round. Only a dangerous and deranged
person would see innocent babies as varmints.
“Well, if guns don’t kill then
neither does nuclear weapons, chemical weapons…so on and so forth.” Yup, you’re right..those are the tools. Every bit as lethal as a firearm but just
sitting in their containers, they’re not killing anyone are they? Once a person turns that key, or arms that
warhead, the tool becomes lethal. Notice
in both cases, you need a human being to activate the tools lethal side. Tools can be corrupted by those with evil
intent, regardless of their perceived original intent.
Including the two events this
week, you’re blaming a tool used in a whopping 6 mass acts of insanity since
1950. Yes, I agree, 6 is too many…but
when taken into context, it’s a tiny number.
Sure, there may have been more we didn’t hear about with gangs or some
guy shoots his family in a fit of lunacy, but spree shootings are what we’re
focused on right now. As I said after
Aurora, maybe 200 total out of how many weapons? Compared to handgun offenses, replica weapons
account for even less carnage.
“Well, why don’t we reinstate the
assault weapons ban now? Keep it from
happening again?? “ Because most of these events occur with handguns, because
even during the ban you could buy weapons of this nature, and because as we
already know, it means nothing to the criminals. Well, then lower capacity magazines...that’ll
stop it cause they wont have 30 rounds to shoot. Yeah, you’re right…after all, they don’t need
that much weight on the weapon. Eric
Harris killed and wounded quite a few people using liberal approved 10 round
magazines at Columbine, in a regular everyday rifle. He didn’t even need that type of firepower
huh? To further end the firepower debate, lets
take the Virginia Tech shooter, who used handguns to commit his evil deed,
killing enough people to take a horrific second place ribbon, directly behind
the Bath School Massacre in the 1920’s.
Those who give up their rights in
the name of safety have neither. The
Second Amendment is not intended for hunting or shooting tin cans. It’s to keep the Government in check. Fine, disassemble the Second Amendment but
when the Government comes for your First Amendment rights…….and they
will…………you will come crying to those of us who went underground, in violation
of the law. And you will beg us for
help. And we’ll say No, we won’t protect
you from yourselves.
Hitler, Stalin and countless
others knew that the way to commit atrocities freely was to disarm the people
at home first. As far as I’m concerned,
anyone pushing for such things here is every bit as dangerous as these lethal
dictators.
