Many are screaming take the semi-automatic and automatic weapons out of the hands of the citizens and keep them only in the hands of the government. According to the late RJ Rummel four times the number of persons were murdered by their governments than killed in warfare. Over 200,000,000 in the 20th century alone.
I don’t trust government and the folks who want to disarm the citizens while keeping the weapons only in the hands of government when it’s apparent from history where the biggest danger and threat lies.
Just take a look a at Catalonia for a recent example. Below is excerpts directly from a recent article, "Catalonia Shows the Danger of Disarming Civilians."
In Spain, firearm ownership is not a protected individual right. Civilian firearms licenses are restricted to “cases of extreme necessity” if the government finds “genuine reason.” Background checks, medical exams, and license restrictions further restrict access. Licenses are granted individually by caliber and model, with automatic weapons strictly forbidden to civilians. Police can demand a citizen produce a firearm at any time for inspection or confiscation. Spain has enacted, it would seem, the kind of “common sense restrictions” American gun-control advocates crave.
Polling stations in Catalonia were attacked by heavily armed agents of the state with riot gear and pointed rifles. Spanish National Police fired rubber bullets and unleashed tear gas canisters on voters, broke down polling center doors, disrupted the vote, and destroyed enough ballots to throw results into serious doubt.
"If somebody tries to declare the independence of part of the territory — something that cannot be done — we will have to do everything possible to apply the law,” Spain’s justice minister said in a public address.
I can see any government being capable of this.
Another good article that might be of interest to folks is: The Australia Model for Gun Control Is Useless
The case of gun control advocates for the U.S. to move to the Australia model for gun ownership is faulty at best, by Corey Iacono.
* * *
Lets see if I understand exactly what the gun control groups are saying. The left and many on the right believe Trump is the reincarnation of "Hitler", that Washington and most of America is controlled by fascist, those that supported Trump are his brown shirts and anyone that disagrees with them is a fascist. And their solution is to put weapons only in the hands of the fascist. Yeah, that makes perfect sense to me.
* * *
We had another major gun incident in this country. We all read about the gore, blood and speculation and the feared ones, never far away, appear with arguments against any meaningful gun legislation. These many that cling to the antiquated 2nd amendment use whatever words they can to convince those that are the most zealot to get their firearms oiled and ready for the invasion. The fear, so outrageous, that somehow the government, oh forgot, our government, the enemy, is moments away from an attack. The argument used so often becomes a fable of belief that the zealots with guns feel they are a victim. Instead of looking at these, now many, massacres in this country, as a symbol that something is awry, they lose all rational thinking and like Speaker Ryan, blame the guy with a gun. The guy with the gun had a cache of guns, ammo and explosives that could outfit a company of U.S. Marines.
Four out of ten people in this country have at least one gun in their home. I have done this experiment enough times to know something factually very interesting. An intruder is attempting to break into a home. I, ever vigilant, rush to my cabinet in my office where I keep my pistol. Not loaded I insert a clip and pull back to load one round. How long does that take? Maybe I have enough time to be at the ready for the intruder who has now nearly broken the door. But what if he is loaded and armed and surprises with gunshot before I can raise my weapon, or this one heard a lot: "I keep a 12 gauge next to my bed." The intruder is making a break-in on the first floor. The shotgun is on the second floor. Guns in the home do not make the homeowner safe. The stats, deadly, point out this little fact and the zealot gun owner ignores and often just buys another gun.
When I was in the military the bumbling recruit might drop his weapon and find for a few night a companion sleeping with him. His rifle. Maybe that is a way to understand those that fear sensible gun legislation. I am or was a hunter of deer, rabbit, squirrel and pheasant. I got my gun training from the NRA. The NRA of today is only a speck of integrity that was once was and now is a lobbying firm with big bucks exploiting the fears they encouraged. The zealot with a gun has been had by the NRA and guess who might be laughing silently?
* * *
Mr. Robert Brooks, you sir, sound like a broken record by the Left. Let’s see, meaningful gun legislation? Please, specifically what is meaningful gun legislation? I hear that a lot from the likes of Diane Feinstein, Maxine Waters, Chuck Schumer, and the rest of the elitist left who have armed security. And, while you're at it, tell me which of the six or eight recent mass shootings that your “meaningful gun legislation” would have prevented?
Then begs the question when you legislate your “meaningful gun control”, who will obey it, and who won’t? Take these awful “assault” weapons from the law abiding citizens and then the only owners are the government and the criminals, and I don’t trust either.
Next comes the mantra from the Left, we’re not wanting to take your guns. You can keep your hunting rifles and shotguns. What they really mean, is until we get your AR and AK platform weapons. Then we will come after the rest. The cake is eaten one bite at a time.
You see, Robert, we patriots who believe that the 2nd Amendment is all about protecting the citizens from the tyranny of the government, we also know that “meaningful gun control” is not really about gun control, it’s just about control.
History is something everyone should study to prevent future disasters. Hitler and Stalin first confiscated weapons from their citizens before murdering millions. I know, we’re all crazy believing that could happen in America. Call me crazy.
* * *
I truly don't know what the answer is on gun control. I believe some guns should be legal while others should be illegal. For example, we do not allow citizens to possess bazookas. I think weapons that are able to kill dozens of people in short bursts should probably be made illegal because their only purpose is to kill dozens of people. I don't have a problem with handguns or rifles. The point of this letter though, is to point out that many arguments that are brought up in favor of keeping the laws the way they are are dubious at best. You've seen a few of those above.
* "We need guns to protect us from the government in case we want to overthrow it." That will never happen. The government is far too organized and has far too much firepower. People who think they'll overthrow the government are delusional, even if they have an arsenal like the Las Vegas shooter.
* "The only defense against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun". Caleb Keeter, a musician with the Josh Abbott Band, who played the concert in Las Vegas said that they indeed did have guns but they couldn't use them because they didn't know where the shooter was, and feared that the police would shoot them for fear they were the shooter. They didn't want to cause confusion and more work for the police. They had guns, and those guns were useless.
* "If we outlaw guns, only criminals will have them." That is not a good reason for keeping something legal. People have shown that they will drink and drive and will kill people in the process but you don't find us throwing our hands up in the air and making drunk driving legal. A reasonable individual does not say just because something is difficult it's not worth making an effort.
I truly do not know what the answer is, but it's depressing that when there is a mass murder there isn't at least some acknowledgement that it would have been infinitely more difficult for someone to kill 58 people and shoot nearly 600 people without a semi automatic machine gun with a device designed to make it approximate a fully automatic and that maybe those shouldn't be legal and available.
* * *
This should not be a partisan discussion, this should not be the type of talk where some point their fingers at others and laugh and chide them for refusing to give up their arms. And I also firmly believe that it wouldn't take a whole lot to have the government suddenly decide "it knows best"; the writers of our Constitution knew first hand what happens when the government decides and not the people.
Over 10 years ago I had a sheriff tell me (and you know who you are) that each citizen should take safety classes and be armed for self protection because the police don't camp out on your doorstep. I was told that the five or 10 minutes it "could" take to get an officer to my home could literally mean my life or my death depending on the situation. I don't think there's an officer out there that would disagree with that.