Tweet
Fellow Americans,
As politicians prepare their attack on the 2nd Amendment, including an
attack on so called "high capacity" magazines, here are some counter
points to their insane, illogical proposals that will endanger us all.
I do not believe an actual ban on so called "Assault Weapons" will happen.
Too much political capital would be expended with too little chance for
success. In my opinion, the real target will be lesser targets, such as
banning so called "high capacity magazines". Hence, most of my thoughts
will be directed towards that topic, in the hopes some of these ideas
will spark others to think of even better arguments to help defend
our 2nd Amendment rights.
I wrote these thoughts down rapidly as they came to me, with minimal
thoughts to typo's and such, since time is of the essence, and we are
almost out of time.
You will find overlaps in logic, some duplications, and some items that
have just a small nuance of distinction from another idea.
Consider this first draft a "diamond in the rough" that needs further
work to achieve maximum brilliance.
Lets begin:
Why do Americans need "high capacity magazines" ?
Why do you need more than <insert arbitary number> in a magazine ?! "
(Translation for the anti-gun crowd: normal capacity = " high capacity")
* In the case of multiple assailants.
* In many rural areas in could take 30 minutes or more for police to
respond to an attack. The family could be on its own for long time.
* Defensive situations are stressful & reduce accuracy tremendously.
You could empty your restricted 7 rnd mag, & miss your attacker.
With a normal 13 to 30 rnd mag, you greatly increase your chances
of surviving the attack, and protecting your family.
* Telling me I do not need a high capacity magazine is the same as telling
Rosa Parks she did not need to sit in the front of the bus.
It is a Civil Right.
(see notes at bottom for proper credit of this statement)
* Ability to use suppression fire to keep bad guys from advancing.
or using it so you can move to a better defensive position.
Supressive fire with 30 rounds is feasible. With only 7 or 10, you are
quite likely to run out of ammo before you can reach a better position,
allowing the criminal / predator to shoot you with impunity.
* An attacker can sustain a few hits, and still be trying to kill you.
This is rarely a 1 shot = kill world. You never know how many rounds it
will take to stop a threat. Or mutiple threats. Criminals have been shot
28 times and lived to see their trial and conviction.
* An attacker is on drugs, & is irrationally determined to kill you.
You could empty your restricted 7 round magazine into them with
little or no apparent effect. If you emptied a normal capacity mag
of say 16 to 19 rounds of 9mm, your chances are greatly improved.
* Despite multiple hits, even though they are "dead man walking"
some violent people will continue to try and kill others until they
lose blood pressure & bleed out. This can take several minutes.
Its not like the movies where one shot from the good guy kills the
bad guy within 2 seconds (unless its a head shot). You need every
round you have to keep them from killing you or your family.
* Americans with a legal conceal carry license would now have to carry
extra mags to match what they currently allready have.. this increases
their chance of "printing" and may result in them running out of ammo
and putting themselves and the people they are protecting in mortal
danger.
* A person unable to shoot proper defensive rounds because of recoil
(they have arthritis, they are veterans who were severely wounded,
they are of small statue or frail, they are disabled in some respect.)
If they can only handle a 22LR recoil, and are restricted to only 10 to 5
rounds, they will be at a disadvantage, since 22LR is not considered to
be a reliable defensive round, and it would take a lot more hits with 22LR
than say a 9mm or 45acp. Allowing them to have 20 to 30 rounds in
their firearm might allow them to live thru an assault.
* A law restricting magazine capacity only punishes the law abiding.
* Criminals can easily make "high capacity" mags even if outlawed.
They simply extend the bottom of existing mags and add a spring.
* Criminals and the insane will use 30+ mags no matter what the law is.
* Has any politician asked the people who actually used a firearm to
defend themselves and their family, how they would feel with having
even less defensive rounds the next time theirs lives are in danger ?
* If "high capacity magazines" are such a concern to law enforcement,
explain why the FBI doesn't track it. (and, btw, so called assault rifles
murder useage is so low, the FBI simply lumps them together with
other rifles... in 2011, All rifles (including AR15) accounted for only
323 murders (2.5%) for the entire nation. The AR15 probably less
than 2%. since the 323 (2.5%) figure includes every type of rifle.
So New York bans a firearm used in less than 2% of murders, while
ignoring millions of Americans using them properly each year to hunt,
defend, and target shoot,...indeed, they just banned the most popular
modern rifle Americans own, simply because a few people out of a
population of 311,000,000 used them illegally to murder about 258
people. Millions Americans using "Assault Weapons" properly each year
versus 258 murders. The Benefits ratio is clearly in favor of keeping
the AR15. To say anything else is being either disingenuous, or you
simply lack the mental ability to perform cost benefit analysis
(your unable to add 2+2 properly. The answer is 4, for those of you
who are thinking 2+2 = Ban ! Sorry to burst your cognitive bubble.)
* There are millions of so called high-capacity magazines in the hands of
Americans, and have been for decades. They are used millions of times
each year by Americans for defense, hunting, target shooting. So you
have millions used legally & safely each year, versus a few used by
a couple of mentally disturbed predators illegally. And now you want to
blame & scream at all the Sane, normal people who did not harm anyone ?
It is irrational to think by punishing the millions of Americans who
legally own & use them, you will somehow stop criminals & insane
predators from using them.
* In the case of a "bad person" from any of the 43 states that have no
restrictions on magazine capacity. They invade the home of a family
living in 1 of 7 states that allow an infringement on self defense.
(Restricting the family to only 10 to 7 rounds). The bad guy has
easily a 3 to 1 advantage over the family he is attacking.
If you think this is solved with a Federal ban on mag capacity, your
wrong. Only law abiding citizens would obey the law, and thus, once
again, the family would be at a serious disavantage as they try to
defend themselves.
* Slippery Slope. New York reduced it to 10, and now 7, another state
is apparently considering 5. When the next massacre occurs
(and it will, since gun-free zones attract insane predators intent on
killing as many defenseless innocents as possible without resistance. )
politicians will push for 3 rnd mags, or just simply outlaw magazines.
* No panels of Firearm experts were consulted about the effect of
restricting magazine capacities on normal people.
* What scientific study was performed on the effects of outlawing
normal magazine capacities (making them now high-caps) ? (None).
* What public hearings were conducted before some states banned
normal capacity (high caps) magazines ? (None)
* Why are people who have never held a firearm, owned a firearm,
shot a firearm, or know anything about firearms (other than
fictional accounts in movies) shouting for restrictions on magazines.
These people are easily identified online. They call magazines "clips",
or assault clips, or High Capacity Assault Clips, or Military grade
high capacity assault clips. Most of these people we call "The Media".
* Would political leaders, Hollywood celebrities, the rich and affluent,
insist that all their bodyguards have restricted capacity magazines ?
* Would police officers feel better about using reduced capacity
mags to protect themselves and family when they retire ?
* Police officer can have 20 rounds in his XDm to defend himself from
a criminal. A law abiding citizen would only have 10 to 5 to defend
himself from the same criminal. How is that even remotely fair ?
* Normal capacity mags should be protected under Heller. AR15's are
designed to use, and often ship with, 30 rnd mags. Magazines are
considered a functional part of the firearm, and 30 round mags are
"in common use". Ergo, limiting mags to 10, or 7 or 5 or Zero nullifies
the intent of the 2nd Amendment and violates Americans Civil Rights.
* TRUE high capacity mags would be mags beyond the original design
and in uncommon use (example would be the 100rnd mag for AR15).
Once again, a 30 round AR15 mag is a NORMAL capacity mag.
* The 2nd Amendment is to protect us from Tyranny. An AR15 with a
30 round magazine is an excellent choice for our first line of defense.
It is indeed the Modern Musket. We may not need the 2nd for the
next 50 to 100 years (or we may need it in 10 ). No one knows the
future. We do know the past. Our own government turned on its
own citizens at the start of WWII, imprisoning 20,000 Americans of
Japanese ancestry. Their land and property were confiscated. Some
never recovered their land and property. It is a travesty that it
happened here, in the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave.
So when an anti 2nd Amendment person rolls their eyes at you and
and mockingly questions your veracity about tyranny, tell them it
already happened 70 years ago to 20,000 Americans.
* We can use inflammatory words just like the politicians:
Senator Fienstein is introducing "High Powered, Military Grade,
Assault Legistration Designed to Kill Innocent People."
Sadly, that is pretty much what it will actually do if enacted.
These are my thoughts on the matter.
Signed,
Noble Cause
Note: Regarding the Statement about Rosa Parks:
I am paraphrasing a line in which the original author had put
"assault rifle. " I do not know who the original author is, but
I think it is brilliant statement. If you know who deserves the credit, please post for all to know. They deserve many accolades.
As politicians prepare their attack on the 2nd Amendment, including an
attack on so called "high capacity" magazines, here are some counter
points to their insane, illogical proposals that will endanger us all.
I do not believe an actual ban on so called "Assault Weapons" will happen.
Too much political capital would be expended with too little chance for
success. In my opinion, the real target will be lesser targets, such as
banning so called "high capacity magazines". Hence, most of my thoughts
will be directed towards that topic, in the hopes some of these ideas
will spark others to think of even better arguments to help defend
our 2nd Amendment rights.
I wrote these thoughts down rapidly as they came to me, with minimal
thoughts to typo's and such, since time is of the essence, and we are
almost out of time.
You will find overlaps in logic, some duplications, and some items that
have just a small nuance of distinction from another idea.
Consider this first draft a "diamond in the rough" that needs further
work to achieve maximum brilliance.
Lets begin:
Why do Americans need "high capacity magazines" ?
Why do you need more than <insert arbitary number> in a magazine ?! "
(Translation for the anti-gun crowd: normal capacity = " high capacity")
* In the case of multiple assailants.
* In many rural areas in could take 30 minutes or more for police to
respond to an attack. The family could be on its own for long time.
* Defensive situations are stressful & reduce accuracy tremendously.
You could empty your restricted 7 rnd mag, & miss your attacker.
With a normal 13 to 30 rnd mag, you greatly increase your chances
of surviving the attack, and protecting your family.
* Telling me I do not need a high capacity magazine is the same as telling
Rosa Parks she did not need to sit in the front of the bus.
It is a Civil Right.
(see notes at bottom for proper credit of this statement)
* Ability to use suppression fire to keep bad guys from advancing.
or using it so you can move to a better defensive position.
Supressive fire with 30 rounds is feasible. With only 7 or 10, you are
quite likely to run out of ammo before you can reach a better position,
allowing the criminal / predator to shoot you with impunity.
* An attacker can sustain a few hits, and still be trying to kill you.
This is rarely a 1 shot = kill world. You never know how many rounds it
will take to stop a threat. Or mutiple threats. Criminals have been shot
28 times and lived to see their trial and conviction.
* An attacker is on drugs, & is irrationally determined to kill you.
You could empty your restricted 7 round magazine into them with
little or no apparent effect. If you emptied a normal capacity mag
of say 16 to 19 rounds of 9mm, your chances are greatly improved.
* Despite multiple hits, even though they are "dead man walking"
some violent people will continue to try and kill others until they
lose blood pressure & bleed out. This can take several minutes.
Its not like the movies where one shot from the good guy kills the
bad guy within 2 seconds (unless its a head shot). You need every
round you have to keep them from killing you or your family.
* Americans with a legal conceal carry license would now have to carry
extra mags to match what they currently allready have.. this increases
their chance of "printing" and may result in them running out of ammo
and putting themselves and the people they are protecting in mortal
danger.
* A person unable to shoot proper defensive rounds because of recoil
(they have arthritis, they are veterans who were severely wounded,
they are of small statue or frail, they are disabled in some respect.)
If they can only handle a 22LR recoil, and are restricted to only 10 to 5
rounds, they will be at a disadvantage, since 22LR is not considered to
be a reliable defensive round, and it would take a lot more hits with 22LR
than say a 9mm or 45acp. Allowing them to have 20 to 30 rounds in
their firearm might allow them to live thru an assault.
* A law restricting magazine capacity only punishes the law abiding.
* Criminals can easily make "high capacity" mags even if outlawed.
They simply extend the bottom of existing mags and add a spring.
* Criminals and the insane will use 30+ mags no matter what the law is.
* Has any politician asked the people who actually used a firearm to
defend themselves and their family, how they would feel with having
even less defensive rounds the next time theirs lives are in danger ?
* If "high capacity magazines" are such a concern to law enforcement,
explain why the FBI doesn't track it. (and, btw, so called assault rifles
murder useage is so low, the FBI simply lumps them together with
other rifles... in 2011, All rifles (including AR15) accounted for only
323 murders (2.5%) for the entire nation. The AR15 probably less
than 2%. since the 323 (2.5%) figure includes every type of rifle.
So New York bans a firearm used in less than 2% of murders, while
ignoring millions of Americans using them properly each year to hunt,
defend, and target shoot,...indeed, they just banned the most popular
modern rifle Americans own, simply because a few people out of a
population of 311,000,000 used them illegally to murder about 258
people. Millions Americans using "Assault Weapons" properly each year
versus 258 murders. The Benefits ratio is clearly in favor of keeping
the AR15. To say anything else is being either disingenuous, or you
simply lack the mental ability to perform cost benefit analysis
(your unable to add 2+2 properly. The answer is 4, for those of you
who are thinking 2+2 = Ban ! Sorry to burst your cognitive bubble.)
* There are millions of so called high-capacity magazines in the hands of
Americans, and have been for decades. They are used millions of times
each year by Americans for defense, hunting, target shooting. So you
have millions used legally & safely each year, versus a few used by
a couple of mentally disturbed predators illegally. And now you want to
blame & scream at all the Sane, normal people who did not harm anyone ?
It is irrational to think by punishing the millions of Americans who
legally own & use them, you will somehow stop criminals & insane
predators from using them.
* In the case of a "bad person" from any of the 43 states that have no
restrictions on magazine capacity. They invade the home of a family
living in 1 of 7 states that allow an infringement on self defense.
(Restricting the family to only 10 to 7 rounds). The bad guy has
easily a 3 to 1 advantage over the family he is attacking.
If you think this is solved with a Federal ban on mag capacity, your
wrong. Only law abiding citizens would obey the law, and thus, once
again, the family would be at a serious disavantage as they try to
defend themselves.
* Slippery Slope. New York reduced it to 10, and now 7, another state
is apparently considering 5. When the next massacre occurs
(and it will, since gun-free zones attract insane predators intent on
killing as many defenseless innocents as possible without resistance. )
politicians will push for 3 rnd mags, or just simply outlaw magazines.
* No panels of Firearm experts were consulted about the effect of
restricting magazine capacities on normal people.
* What scientific study was performed on the effects of outlawing
normal magazine capacities (making them now high-caps) ? (None).
* What public hearings were conducted before some states banned
normal capacity (high caps) magazines ? (None)
* Why are people who have never held a firearm, owned a firearm,
shot a firearm, or know anything about firearms (other than
fictional accounts in movies) shouting for restrictions on magazines.
These people are easily identified online. They call magazines "clips",
or assault clips, or High Capacity Assault Clips, or Military grade
high capacity assault clips. Most of these people we call "The Media".
* Would political leaders, Hollywood celebrities, the rich and affluent,
insist that all their bodyguards have restricted capacity magazines ?
* Would police officers feel better about using reduced capacity
mags to protect themselves and family when they retire ?
* Police officer can have 20 rounds in his XDm to defend himself from
a criminal. A law abiding citizen would only have 10 to 5 to defend
himself from the same criminal. How is that even remotely fair ?
* Normal capacity mags should be protected under Heller. AR15's are
designed to use, and often ship with, 30 rnd mags. Magazines are
considered a functional part of the firearm, and 30 round mags are
"in common use". Ergo, limiting mags to 10, or 7 or 5 or Zero nullifies
the intent of the 2nd Amendment and violates Americans Civil Rights.
* TRUE high capacity mags would be mags beyond the original design
and in uncommon use (example would be the 100rnd mag for AR15).
Once again, a 30 round AR15 mag is a NORMAL capacity mag.
* The 2nd Amendment is to protect us from Tyranny. An AR15 with a
30 round magazine is an excellent choice for our first line of defense.
It is indeed the Modern Musket. We may not need the 2nd for the
next 50 to 100 years (or we may need it in 10 ). No one knows the
future. We do know the past. Our own government turned on its
own citizens at the start of WWII, imprisoning 20,000 Americans of
Japanese ancestry. Their land and property were confiscated. Some
never recovered their land and property. It is a travesty that it
happened here, in the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave.
So when an anti 2nd Amendment person rolls their eyes at you and
and mockingly questions your veracity about tyranny, tell them it
already happened 70 years ago to 20,000 Americans.
* We can use inflammatory words just like the politicians:
Senator Fienstein is introducing "High Powered, Military Grade,
Assault Legistration Designed to Kill Innocent People."
Sadly, that is pretty much what it will actually do if enacted.
These are my thoughts on the matter.
Signed,
Noble Cause
Note: Regarding the Statement about Rosa Parks:
I am paraphrasing a line in which the original author had put
"assault rifle. " I do not know who the original author is, but
I think it is brilliant statement. If you know who deserves the credit, please post for all to know. They deserve many accolades.
Comment