An Open Letter to My Senators and Congressmen And All Others Who Say “I support the Second Amendment but….”

Guns save lives. Support the Second Amendment.

Guns save lives. Support the Second Amendment.

I implore you to truly support the Second Amendment by voting AGAINST any new "assault weapon ban," magazine limits or universal background checks.

On so-called "assault weapons" and magazine limits, the federal government's own research has found no conclusive evidence that the AWB of '94 had any effect on violent crime rates.

Further, the dishonesty inherent in the '94 AWB as well as current proposals for a new "assault weapon ban" rely on confusion and deception by attempting to convince Americans that the firearms to be restricted or prohibited are actually assault rifles, which they most assuredly are not, or that they are actually more dangerous or powerful than other semi-automatic rifles, which they are not. The AR-15 platform and other similar firearms that would be banned or restricted under the new proposals are nothing more than intermediate-power garden-variety semi-automatic rifles that in most cases are less powerful than the average hunting rifle. The proposed bans are based purely on scary-looking features such as barrel shrouds and pistol grips.

Further, the firearms to be banned or restricted under these new proposals are rarely used in crimes; knives, hammers, and hands & feet are used to assault or kill innocent individuals far more often then "assault weapons."

These firearms do, however, serve as excellent home-defense weapons; they are lightweight and have low recoil, so that they are easy to use by women living alone or alone with children, and they have a lower likelihood of penetration through walls than many other rifles, making them safer for use in home defense than more powerful rifles. There are many other advantages and benefits of so-called "assault weapons" for law-abiding citizens, and it is unconscionable to prohibit law-abiding citizens from using this ideal firearm in defense of themselves and their children while knowing that criminals will always find ways to obtain whatever firearms and other weapons they desire.

Limits on magazine capacity are undesirable for other reasons.  While the bad guys -- who by definition don't obey the law -- will have standard-capacity magazines holding 15, 20 or more rounds if they desire, and can also equip themselves with multiple magazines for their criminal activities, the law-abiding citizen will, by definition, obey the law and voluntarily limit himself to a reduced-capacity magazine holding only 10 rounds or less. At that point, the law-abiding citizen is already at a disadvantage vis-a-vis the bad guy.

Furthermore, while not common, home invasions by multiple intruders do occur. A law-abiding citizen, awakened from a sound sleep to face 2, 3 or more armed criminals, faces a very real possibility of needing more than 10 rounds to stop the threat. Did you see the recent news report of the woman hiding from an intruder with her children in her attic? The intruder discovered the family's location. The woman fired 6 times, hitting the intruder 5 times, before he stopped approaching. The intruder survived and was still capable of fleeing in his car. Imagine if that woman had not been as accurate in her shooting, or if there had been more than one bad guy; she and her children would likely have been killed because she lacked sufficient ammunition. Restricting the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves and their children is unconscionable.

Universal background checks are another matter entirely and should be rejected outright for other reasons. First, they would be completely ineffective. The bad guys will not run background checks on each other when selling guns illegally, nor are background checks part of any gun theft activities. Regardless of what the law requires, any criminal can easily obtain a firearm with no background check, and will always be able to do so.

Worse than the ineffectiveness, though, is that the only way a requirement for background checks on private sales could be enforceable at all would be with a national gun database -- i.e., registration -- because without such a database there would be no way whatsoever to prove that any individual acquired any particular gun after the effective date of such a law.

Without registration, any individual could sell any firearm to any other individual via private sale with no background check, and there would be no evidence of the sale and no proof of law breaking. Both the seller and the buyer could claim that the sale occurred prior to the background-check requirement, and there would be no evidence to the contrary. The fact that registration would be needed for any enforcement of universal  background checks is borne out by Vice President Joe Biden, who said that the gun control task force "is seriously considering measures backed by key law enforcement leaders that would require universal background checks for firearm buyers [and] track the movement and sale of weapons through a national database."

We will not forgive. We will not forget. We will not comply.

We will not forgive. We will not forget. We will not comply. Molon Labe!

It's highly likely that any such registration requirement would be widely flouted, instantly turning millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens into criminals overnight. In fact, Canada recently retired its national long gun registry due to widespread non-compliance. (It's estimated that 70% of long guns were never registered.) Instantly turning millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens into criminals overnight is a good way to foster widespread distrust and non-compliance with other laws, because hey, once you're a criminal anyway, why bother to obey other laws?

The likely widespread non-compliance with the proposed new gun-control laws is shown in part by the actions of state and local governments in passing "Second Amendment Protection" acts in which they state they will refuse to pursue or prosecute, or to assist federal investigators in pursuing or prosecuting, these proposed laws.

There is going to be major push-back from millions of gun owners and Second Amendment supporters at levels never seen before. Many Sheriffs are stating openly that they will not enforce such laws. Gun owners are stating openly that they will not comply with such laws. Gun owners and Second Amendment supporters will not forgive and we will not forget those who oppose the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. We are not panicking, but we are taking a stand and drawing a line.

If you truly support taking effective action to prevent and reduce violent crime, you will focus your attention on improving mental health treatment, keeping convicted criminals imprisoned for longer than a fraction of their sentences, improving security at schools and other victim-disarmament zones, and other areas where new laws and requirements may have some beneficial effect. If you truly support the Second Amendment, you will not support a new assault weapon ban, magazine capacity restrictions, or universal background checks.

Speak Your Mind


%d bloggers like this: -