I have recently heard the President and media pundits talking about banning semi-automatic weapons. I find this interesting for the President, a man who clearly bases his level of security on having armed men around him. Men armed with the similar weapons to what the shooter took into Sandy Hook elementary. According to Ronald Kessler of Newsmax, and author of In the Presidentís Secret Service: Behind the Scenes With Agents...
, Secret Service agents protecting the President-Elect at his inauguration were armed with SIG Sauer P229 pistols and "fully automatic Stoner SR- 16 rifles and flash bang grenades". In the Presidentís Secret Servicehttp://w3.newsmax.com/a/aug09/secret_service/
This confuses me, because the President thinks my semi-automatic AK-47 is dangerous, and it's not safe for me to have it. His family is "secured" by men with "fully automatic" guns, but I can't have a semi-auto to protect my family? I shouldn't be allowed to carry my semi-automatic Glock handgun when I go to the mall or out to eat with my wife? Should she just stop wearing her grandmother's diamond earrings and her wedding ring?
Pundits like Piers Morgan, keep pointing out that you are less likely to get shot in the UK where guns are banned. What they don't mention is that you are more likely to be the victim of a crime. The United States has a population ten times larger than the UK, but only has twice as much crime. France and Germany, both of which have strict gun laws, are close to the UK for total crime. The US, with it's concealed carry and "castle" laws has a lower crime rate overall. That's a fact. The terrorists who took over the planes on 9/11 were armed with "box cutters", which only worked because planes are "weapon-free" zones. Crime Statistics > Total crimes (most recent) by countryhttp://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri-crime-total-crimes
Another thing that strikes me as odd about politicians calling for a gun ban is that the Second Amendment doesn't give me a "right to own a musket", or guarantee me a "right to hunt and trap". It guarantees me the ability to be armed. The "right to bear arms" is a rather vague phrase. If I tell a cop that there is an armed man running down the street, they are going to ask what he is armed with. What is his armament? Knife, sword, gun, bomb, cannon...? The Second Amendment makes no mention of what the arms are to be used for except to maintain a "free state". Constitutional scholars agree that the founder's idea of a "free state" was one where men were free to do as they please without control from the government. The Very Politically Incorrect Truth About The Second Amendmenthttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igerQd0dpHY
Something else I don't hear the President or pundits mention is that the majority of the gun deaths occur in large cities where there are already strict gun laws. The majority of the 12,000 people killed every year are criminals and drug addicts who live in poverty. The gun violence in this country is clearly a symptom of economic disparity between the classes. Guns are the weapon of choice for the poor, ignorant and mentally ill. The vast majority of these mass shootings have been committed by someone on pharmaceutical drugs, which kill 9 times as many Americans every year than guns. And, clearly we should consider passing laws that keep people on anti-depressants away from guns. It has proven to be a dangerous combination.
One other thing I have noticed about the people calling loudest for a gun ban...they are largely the same people who call border security "racist". Any attempt by the states to protect their border with Mexico has been labeled racist in the media. If we want to have a gun ban, and take the guns away from the law abiding citizen, then we must protect those citizens by securing our border. Which means armed military. We do it in Iraq and Afghanistan. The UK secures it's border to insure no one brings in guns. Try getting into the UK with credentials they don't recognize... Iroquois Nationals Visa Issues Continue: Immigration Cowboys Refuse Entry to Teamhttp://insidelacrosse.com/news/2010/07/12/iroquois-nationals-visa-issues-continue-immigration-cowboys-refuse-entry-team
In conclusion, I would just like to point out that our society is based on a belief that guns = security. It's where we put most of our money. Whenever there is a disaster we send our military to "help". We protect our most valuable community resources with armed men. Our politicians are surrounded by armed men they call "security". Our local police are the most heavily armed gang in our communities and we have them for "protection". As I pointed out earlier, the President himself depends on men with big guns to insure the security of himself and his family. It is incredibly hypocritical for him to try and deprive me of providing that level of security for my own family. It isn't just confusing, it seems very un-American and just generally dangerous for "We the People".
~~~ Just needed to rant since Yahoo! won't allow me to comment on articles anymore...