On Outlawing Semi-Automatic Weapons
I posted this to Facebook in October 2017 after the Las Vegas shooting. It remains valid after a weekend of carnage, and no end in sight. FWIW, I am for constitutional gun ownership.
I am not for the capability of killing 30-50 people (not feral hogs) in under a minute.
I am not for the capability of killing 30-50 people (not feral hogs) in under a minute.
After today, I'm struggling to see the use in an AR-15 with a binary trigger and a 100 round drum magazine.
I've been next to a guy with a setup like that at the range. While not strictly speaking an automatic weapon, the purpose is clear: Sling as much lead as fast as possible downrange.
Look, I'm a proud and safe gun owner. I support the right to bear arms, per our Constitution. But, if an event like today never happened again, I'd happily support outlawing semiautomatic weapons of any kind.
In all candor, any legitimate use you have for a firearm works fine with a bolt action rifle, pump shotgun, or revolver.
I'm willing to accept arguments to the contrary.
Heck, I'll start.
1) "So, sure, let the bad guys have the real guns and I'm stuck with this J-frame .38?"
Lower the tommygun, Clyde. The chance of you needing over 6-8 shots is vanishingly small. If you want to be that guy, they do make speedloaders.
2) "But, what if ATF raids my house?"
Then, you comply with the law and don't resist arrest. Or, you die. Stop watching so many movies. They have drones and Hellfire missiles, you don't.
If "the gubmint" ever comes for you, you're dead. Auspiciously, the government is by and for the People, so I'll go ahead and say we should work within the constitution to make sure "they" (there's that word again) don't come for you.
3) "But, I love my Glocks!"
Finally, a real point. Well, so do I. However, your range toy, belt-accessory, and IPSA trophies aren't worth 600 lives. No, sir.
4) "It won't stop there! That's just the first step...then they'll come for everything else!"
Maybe. "They" will probably just starve you out, honestly. Stockpile all the 10,000 rounds of .22LR (Seriously?) you want, nothing would prevent that.
5) There's no practical way to do this.
Yep, that's the kicker. We've had semiautomatics since John Browning. it's going to be impossible to do any of the above. There are just too many guns.
6) The Constitution says what it says.
It says "The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Grenades are arms. Bazookas are arms. Can I possess them? No. Do I want the ATF to confiscate any that are out there? Yes. Does that violate the 2nd amendment?
No, it doesn't. This is open to interpretation. The courts interpret the laws. The court could darn well decide the line is reasonable. Or better yet, Congress could pass a law, the Supreme Court could say "yep, seems good" and we're safer.
Crazies in this country often try to kill other people. The mental health system isn't going to stop them. We need to deal with both the supply (semi-automatic weapons) and the demand (mentally unhinged people, often Domestic Terrorists).
This is our country and WE could decide to do that. WE just haven't.
I've been next to a guy with a setup like that at the range. While not strictly speaking an automatic weapon, the purpose is clear: Sling as much lead as fast as possible downrange.
Look, I'm a proud and safe gun owner. I support the right to bear arms, per our Constitution. But, if an event like today never happened again, I'd happily support outlawing semiautomatic weapons of any kind.
In all candor, any legitimate use you have for a firearm works fine with a bolt action rifle, pump shotgun, or revolver.
Can you really not keep someone out of your house with a .44 or a .357 magnum?
I'm willing to accept arguments to the contrary.
Heck, I'll start.
1) "So, sure, let the bad guys have the real guns and I'm stuck with this J-frame .38?"
Lower the tommygun, Clyde. The chance of you needing over 6-8 shots is vanishingly small. If you want to be that guy, they do make speedloaders.
2) "But, what if ATF raids my house?"
Then, you comply with the law and don't resist arrest. Or, you die. Stop watching so many movies. They have drones and Hellfire missiles, you don't.
If "the gubmint" ever comes for you, you're dead. Auspiciously, the government is by and for the People, so I'll go ahead and say we should work within the constitution to make sure "they" (there's that word again) don't come for you.
3) "But, I love my Glocks!"
Finally, a real point. Well, so do I. However, your range toy, belt-accessory, and IPSA trophies aren't worth 600 lives. No, sir.
4) "It won't stop there! That's just the first step...then they'll come for everything else!"
Maybe. "They" will probably just starve you out, honestly. Stockpile all the 10,000 rounds of .22LR (Seriously?) you want, nothing would prevent that.
5) There's no practical way to do this.
Yep, that's the kicker. We've had semiautomatics since John Browning. it's going to be impossible to do any of the above. There are just too many guns.
6) The Constitution says what it says.
It says "The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Grenades are arms. Bazookas are arms. Can I possess them? No. Do I want the ATF to confiscate any that are out there? Yes. Does that violate the 2nd amendment?
No, it doesn't. This is open to interpretation. The courts interpret the laws. The court could darn well decide the line is reasonable. Or better yet, Congress could pass a law, the Supreme Court could say "yep, seems good" and we're safer.
Crazies in this country often try to kill other people. The mental health system isn't going to stop them. We need to deal with both the supply (semi-automatic weapons) and the demand (mentally unhinged people, often Domestic Terrorists).
This is our country and WE could decide to do that. WE just haven't.
Comments
Post a Comment