Alan Korwin, visit his website GunLaws.com.
The lamestream media told you:
Many times over: No one needs an AR-15. All we want to do is ban the AR-15. It’s a weapon of war. It’s a killing machine. It has no place on our streets. The Founders never could have imagined any such thing in the hands of the public. It’s too dangerous for the public to own. The magazine is too large. The bullets can be fired too quickly. It’s scary looking. You don’t need it to hunt ducks. It doesn’t matter if police have them.
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
Having listed those familiar complaints, I’ll answer them just as fast: Property ownership in this country isn’t based on need (and you don’t get to decide someone else’s need, that’s the communist model). All we want is to have the finest rifle made. It’s a weapon of peace. It’s a self-defense firearm. It’s perfect for the public. The Founders never could have imagined throwing your voice further than you can speak either. It’s too dangerous for the government to be sole owners. Insufficient ammo supply can be lethal. Slow-firing guns are dangerous. Scary is in the eye of the beholder, you might need treatment. Preferences for hunting are personal, immaterial here, not your concern and disconnected from the right to keep and bear arms. Police have them for the exact same reasons we want them. OK, so much for that.
(Photo: Everytown for Gun Safety)
Banning the AR-15, America’s Rifle, as media-promoted child “survivors” are trying to force upon this great nation, is not only a bad idea, it’s illegal — infringement — and as a practical matter, it’s hard.
You can’t ban guns by name, people will just change the name, that doesn’t work. You can describe guns, but people just modify the designs so they don’t fit the description. That’s been tried, it was a failure.
There’re too many manufacturers, that cat’s out of the bag, along with the engineering plans, so you can’t close down the plants. If you do somehow outlaw manufacture what do you do about the millions of guns people own?
Confiscation is the answer, among the most heinous government crimes there are, illegal a dozen different ways, and incendiary to the public. The rule of law has to be abandoned for that one. When government doesn’t or can’t enforce the law, the militia gets called up.
Buying the guns back, an idea sometimes mentioned, runs up against the treasury which hasn’t got the funds, and no votes in favor. Buying from unwilling sellers is confiscation again, disguised with ribbon and bow.
SEE ALSO: When Banks Attack: Citigroup’s Anti-Gun Policies May Provide ‘Template’ for Others
All of the drastic ideas like this tempt armed rebellion, literally, from the very people whose guns you want to take, so you must tread lightly there. Will police and soldiers shoot at Americans defending their firearms? Do you really want to push things that far? That’s not much of a plan.
Note, all the bans so far haven’t disarmed inner cities, where murderers murder 6,000 victims a year, with virtually no murder trials. Guns get smuggled into this country like drugs, women and “undocumented migrant workers and repeat offenders,” so that side of an AR-15 ban is not exactly airtight.
So what did they (that’s the Democrat party, the one with no demonstrated respect for the right to keep and bear arms) do to ban the AR-15, when they drafted their bill? The bill the marching children, referred to as ignorant useful idiots by some leading experts, what did that bill propose?
They banned every rifle, pistol and shotgun that takes a magazine of any size, and has a grip.
Most but not all pistols will escape the law under the “two-grip” rule. In the past though, BATFE, the agency responsible for enforcing these things, has been known to fabricate their own parts to “prove” a firearm was subject to enforcement.
The AR-15 Ban, edited for pertinent part:
(36) The term ‘semiautomatic assault weapon’ means any of the following:
(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any 1 of the following:
(i) A pistol grip.
(D) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any 1 of the following:
(ii) A second pistol grip.
(F) A semiautomatic shotgun that has any 1 of the following:
(ii) A pistol grip.
(39) The term ‘detachable magazine’ means an ammunition feeding device that can be removed from a firearm without disassembly of the firearm action.*
(46) The term ‘pistol grip’ means a grip, a thumb-hole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.
*Editor’s note: Any capacity magazine is included.
It’s safe to say every mass media report on the move to ban the AR-15, or assault weapons, has been fake, phony or wrong, based on the bill.
I believe the main reason why liberals seem to be unable to pass gun laws is because they don’t really want to.
Last issue with the federal ban on bump firing devices is very clear example. Everyone was ready to pass a bill on bump stocks but when the democrat bill reached the floor it was so bad, crazy overreaching and ambiguous that even some democrats voted against it. This was of course done in purpose, if that bill passed they wouldn’t be able to use the issue anymore, they need all the hot buttons they can get to try next election, they live on problems, the cause or maintain those problems so the situation can be twisted to confuse people into voting for them
The Second Amendment was supposed to be the Second and Third, but the Framers combined the two into one, with it originally being divided in the middle with a semicolon. This showed two connected but separate ideas. The First Amendment can be read just as simply. The Second has the NRA to defend it. The First, the ACLU. The ACLU and liberal judges have read the First to allow every form of perversion to be legalized in this country. They have championed the reading of it to allow elements that have removed integrity and character as individual traits to be reached for. The have made a disease that still kills a million people a year worldwide, as something you can not discuss or ask someone if they have. On top of that, they have supported abortion as a means of birth control. The ACLU and it’s supporters have the blood of 50 million unborn children on their hands from the past 45 years. Which group has been more of a threat to the American way of life?.
Mr Korwin,
“All of the drastic ideas like this tempt armed rebellion, literally, from the very people whose guns you want to take, so you must tread lightly there.”
Is this a threat? Could this be incitement to the armed overthrow of the U.S. Government? Shouldn’t you tread lightly?
“Will police and soldiers shoot at Americans defending their firearms? Do you really want to push things that far?”
Will police and soldiers shoot at Americans attempting the armed overthrow of the U.S. Government? Do you really want to encourage readers to find out?
The most effective way to muster enough support to fight this far left insanity is to join the NRA. You need the resources to fight what is obviously the first step in Australian style gun confiscation. Many together will prevail. The only reason this people have a forum is because of the Far Left media harping all the time.
As a supporter — I find it disgraceful that your statistics are not only false – but ludicrous. You will have your supporters look like fools using your figures. The first number alone is outrageous!!! Total number of ALL vehicle related deaths in 2017 was less than 50K. How do you expect me to support an organization that uses fabricated data??????????
Auto Deaths: 260,000 children killed /yr
Abduction: 2,000/yr
Drowning: 175,000/yr
Burns: 96,000/yr
Falls: 47,000/yr
Poisoning: 45,000/yr
It’ll never end. London, England just banned knives. Without guns their homicide rate was the same as NYC
Anyone who doubts the ATF would fire first and ask questions later has a short memory, Waco anyone? The dimocrats have been hell bent on taking our firearms for a long time, voting is the best way to stop them. Last Sunday, the liberal rag they call a paper around here had some of the “useful stooges” on the front page “creeped out” by legal citizens exercising their Constitutional rights, that just reflects the level of indoctrination they have been subjected to. They were “remembering” Columbine, more like exploiting it for their own stupidity. Most of the military will do as they are ordered and so will LEO if push comes to shove, to believe otherwise is ignorant. There has never been a more critical time to support people running for office that reflect your views than now, this next election cycle is extremely important. Support them with your dollars and help out with the campaign, otherwise you get what the anti Second Amendment crowd wants. They are the vocal minority and can be defeated, but not unless we as a group act.
I’m against a semi-auto/AR15 ban because unless it’s proven by empirical evidence they are responsible for “gun violence”, it’s a little like banning shoes because criminals run from the scene of the crime in them. Yes, they frequently are used by nutjobs to “mass murder” but they’d find a way to kill even IF there is a ban, and unless it can be proven (and I encourage the ATF and CDC to carry on a comprehensive study on the matter as long as it was unbiased and fair) ARs are responsible why get rid of them? I do not own one now, I have in the past but I didn’t care much for it’s fussy nature on ammo and fragile nature. BUT I do own several Ruger Mini 14’s (goes “Bang” EVERY time, even full of shit) and a 10/22, a Springfield M1A (a vastly superior weapon), and I plan to own another AK in the near future, and if you ban “assault rifles” then I’m going to have give up MY firearms of choice. So no matter my opinion which is not always in line with 21 Century gun thought, I do not support a ban on semi-auto’s, although as far as high cap mags go I really could care less. I remember when there were many guns you couldn’t own now back in the 1960s-70s that are available now, so I really DON’T buy into the “loss of Freedom” thing either (I’d like to buy dynamite too to defend my perimeter, but hey, there ya go…), but I am anti-stupid, and getting rid of a class of firearms that may or MAY NOT (and probably NOT) be responsible for this admittedly awful acts without knowing is stupid.
Common sense observation:
Every time someone says gun control or ban guns of any kind they are met with opposition from pro 2A supporters and the struggle continues. Meeting opposition with opposition and fire with fire is not always the answer and just about always adds fuel and forces everyone to dig in for a bigger fight. Anti-gunners are using our nations kids to get into the hearts of both sides of the 2A, it’s working and it’s pissing off 2A supporters. In response; the pro 2A folks pitch statistics and guess what, the anti-gunners are not listening because it’s not on their agenda! The nation’s kids are marching for their lives and creating a new level of gun control supporters including Republican’s who support the 2A.
What’s the answer because what we’re doing in support of our 2A rights is not working and gun control is hitting the law books in small towns all across America?!! The anti-gunners have found a new way to effect gun control at a smaller level in government. They will keep pushing this agenda to kill the 2A as long as it continues to work. The fact is, what they are doing is out smarting the 2A side of the fight, feeding the public with false information and BS… It’s working!
If we the people of America stand together in defense of stopping the killings of our nation’s children, does it make sense to expose all of the evil elements that are doing so and not just guns?… The numbers below reflect the differences between a larger group of child killers verses guns. Yes more statistics but it speaks volumes.
Auto Deaths: 260,000 children killed /yr
Abduction: 2,000/yr
Drowning: 175,000/yr
Burns: 96,000/yr
Falls: 47,000/yr
Poisoning: 45,000/yr
= 625,000 children killed per year in the U.S.A. “not” from guns
-vs-
All Gun Deaths: Less than 1,300 children killed per year
56% are killed in gang related shootings ages 17 – 19
34% killed by suicide
6% killed by accidental shootings
“Less than 60 are killed in mass shootings per year”
Gun control is the least of our nation’s worries when it comes to our nation’s children being killed in mass shootings but still very much in the big picture. “ALL CHILDREN’S LIVES MATTER!” Banning “assault weapons” or repealing the 2nd amendment will “never” save 625,000 children that are killed each year much less than “60” per year from mass shootings.
If the media refuses to post these figures they need to be called out as child killers for not reporting the truth to what is really killing our nation’s children. Further, we the people need to demand from all of our politicians that they get busy protecting all of our nation’s children and demand to know why the lives of children killed by guns is more important and on the front of the headlines daily over the “625,000” annually some “1,712” children that are killed daily by other offenders?!!!
Make the March for Our lives with national student 2A supporters include “ALL CHILDRENS LIVES MATTER!” If the anti-gunners can do it so can the pro 2A supporters… Smother the “mass shooting” lingo with MASS KILLING of our nation’s children ring out! Since the politicians in support of gun control are using the children of America to sell their agenda, let’s make them answer the question why 60 children killed per year in mass shootings is more important than the 625,000 children killed annually by other means?!! Repeat Repeat Repeat the rhetoric!
Why is the 2nd amendment the only constitutional right I need a permit for???
If the Second Amendment gives citizens the Right to keep and bear arms, as a function of being able to produce a well-regulated militia, wouldn’t it be logical to think this would include military type weaponry? Militia… Military… Citizen Military!
People who dispute the Second Amendment only need to ask a WWII veteran the importance of gun ownership and how our Military Service people throughout our countries history have saved lives and influenced global politics to our benefit. If it weren’t for Brave Men and Women fighting & dying on the beaches of Normandy, Pearl Harbor, Iwo Jima etc. the world would be a completely different place today, and not for the better.
YES, this was the decision of US vs Miller. The weapons that would be “protected” would be weapons that would be used by the “militia” for the “common defense” ….
Second amendment does NOT give anybody the right to keep and bear arms.
It just prohibit any government to infringe on this specific right that everybody naturally have.
You could say is a god given right like the right to live, no government nor Constitution can give you something that you already had.
First off, there is no such thing as an “assault gun”. The military has its field rifles such as the M-16 that is used by all military services and it is a full automatic weapon whereas the AR-15 is semi-automatic. The military has use for a semi-automatic rifle. We have many semi-automatic guns on the market that use the same ammo as the AR-15 that are not ‘black’ in design. If the black scares them, I guess we can paint them pink to make them happy. The term ‘assault weapon’ is a news media term not used anywhere in the military or civilian sectors.
As far as the AR-15, it is just another gun. The users of the AR-15 can absolutely use it for hunting. Why not?
it is accurate and light to carry which makes it an ideal hunting rifle.
Does that mean if we all paint our AR’s green ,then that would be alright ? Naw mine came black and that’s fine whit me. Oh the 40 round mag is green that good right ?
Actually the military version is an M4 and it is a 3 shot burst.
The National Guard and Reserves still use the M16, which can be fully automatic or three-round burst.
America ain’t Australia!
I have a Democrat U.S. Senator(Bill Nelson) and a Democrat Congressman(Ted Deutch). I have written/called both several times on gun issues, to no avail. They are both Democrat stooges and go 100% with the Party line on gun control. Deutch is a rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth gun banner. Nelson claims he’s a gun owner & hunter, yet Totally supports the Party gun confiscation plan.
NEVER TRUST THE DEMOCRAT LIES! NEVER VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT! (or RINO)
A “free” people does not need a 2nd Amendment; but, the attacks on the 2A are attacks on individual freedom.
Anything “government” is an impairment on our individual liberty. And, generally, anything government adds am unnecessary burden of cost on the taxpayer. Nearly everything “gun” has an excise tax on it.
The question of safety is a relative one. It is also one of individual responsibility. Why do we offer the insane a target rich environment with over a thousand kids in it? Why not spread the risk by having smaller schools. Students might actually get to know folks outside of their cliques.
Why should we impair individual freedom because of a few bad apples?
How can there even be a response to that question unless of course you believe in Mao, Stalin, Hitler and the other socialists/communists who care about their power and not the unique American concept of individual freedoms? What other country as free as the USA? j
There will never be an effective ban of the AR-15 or any other so-called “assault weapon.”
But the way things are going, there may well be a civil war, a new revolution.
The AR15 is not an “assault weapon”. Out of the box it is incapable of full-auto fire and therefore NOT a military-grade weapon. The 2nd. Amendment is what protects private ownership of military-grade small-arms anyway.
When the founders wrote the 2nd, they sought to protect the rights of citizens to bear the most advanced and lethal weapons of their day so that when the militia needed to be formed they would have at their disposal the best equipped fighting force. They didn’t limit the right to cap and ball pistols and smooth bore muskets. They allowed the public to own the feared precision sniper rifle – The Kentucky Long Rifle. It was feared by the British because it was extremely accurate at much longer distance than their muskets. They also fired the very efficient and aerodynamic miniball. When combined with pre-charged wad and powder “cartridges” it was also fast to load. It was the “assault weapon” of its day. And the public could own one unrestricted.
A few hundred people have died by “assault rifles” over the last few years. Roughly 10,000 die each year by violent gun crime. Over 64,000 die from drug overdoses (2016). Over 88,000 die annually from alcohol related causes (CDC). If we want to protect our youth and citizens we should ban and confiscate alcohol, spirits, beer and wine. They are solely manufactured to get people drunk. There is no public benefit from the manufacture, distribution, possession and use of recreational alcohol. How will that fly with the general public? You must admit it is a more compelling argument than banning “assault rifles”.
Yes, “ban alcohol, spirits, beer and wine”. Didn’t we try that once before?
I live out in the country 30 minutes from the Mexican Border, I hear automatic weapons firing every night. You are telling me I can’t have a weapon equal or better than they have to protect my family. We are on our own here it takes over an hour for the Sheriff department to show up. Get real people we are at war it’s just a matter of time before they are here at my door. You are next.
I shoot. And on times of necessity? I carry. And I don’t kill. I have had dangerous encounters where I could have. But let the law breaker turn, and run. And I did not squeeze the trigger. And for that judgment call? It was my own. And I use this judgment on my life. Not my magazine capacity. I don’t want to hurt anyone. But I am also not a fool. And I don’t need uneducated children or the anti gun lobbies. To tell me how bad a person I am because of a tool. A weapon is a means to an end. A tool is something that you use for a potential job. But I am just as responsible for what I do with a hammer. Than my rifle.
Very good article. In addition to the moronic, left-wing politicians, I think the BATF is the most disgusting and dangerous federal agency in existence. I speak from first hand experience. As a former Marine, I do not think ‘American’ troops would ever fire on U.S. civilians defending their second amendment rights, but I do think BATF would, in a heartbeat. These unelected scumbags have far out-lived any usefulness. I could write a book of their misdeeds.
Agree with you. The regular military would probably stand down, but not sure about federal LEO, some local police, and even the National Guard (if called out by a libtard like Brown or Cuomo)
Gourdhead-Have to agree on most of your points, but I think there are plenty of servicemen willing to pull the trigger if the media can make gun owners into monsters like the Nazis did. They were able to convince the military it was okay to murder innocent men, women and children.
I am NOT ban my AR-15 .. but I don’t need shoot at good people but only I shoot at criminal who the one used gun on clerk or rob money from people or steal a someone car .. someone trespassing my property and stealing my stuff … if police are not available in my area also I have 16 security cameras on 20 acres…if u tried to ban any AR -15 it’s very STUPIDITY PERIOD!!!!!!
Done once before under Clinton and failed. This time they’ll push for it to be permanent. What concerns me is “grandfathering.” They are already trying to make “bump stocks” illegal to own, period.
And even more disturbing are the states, localities, and municipalities that are clearly overstepping their authority, IMO, on out right bans on firearms and accessories.
I still have bump stocks I bought last 2 years ago I used that at outside range . I don’t need to shoot at good people!!!!!