These weapons are not for hunting, sport or self defense. They were designed to kill large numbers of people very quickly and easily and are marketed for sport.
These weapons are not for hunting, sport or self defense. They were designed to kill large numbers of people very quickly and easily and are marketed as an ego booster.
What is it about these fanatics and their desire to have weapons that aren't for self defense or can be used for hunting? These guns were designed and developed with one thing in mind, to be able to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time quickly and efficiently.
All too often when you think that something may finally get done to restrict these guns from public use, the pro gun fanatics come up with the "irrational" rationale that they may have to go to war and overthrow our government.
Where does these ideas come from for committing domestic terrorism? When they don't agree with the laws that are made by a democratically elected government, they don't think that they should apply to them?
No matter how you frame an argument to illustrate the dangerous consequences that can arise by allowing military grade weapons into the hands of the civilian population, they will continue to use the go to reason of why should they be punished for the few people that shouldn't have access to these weapons. Or the all time favorite of the armed militias, they need to protect themselves from government overreach and tyranny just like the founding fathers of this country did.
Who do they think they would be fighting against? How would they fare against the might of the US military? The National Guard or local law enforcement agencies are also made up of our sons and daughters, friends and neighbors.
If it's not them, will it be the assassination of an elected official? Each of these scenarios are "DOMESTIC TERRORISM" pure and simple! This effectively removes the notion of them having assault rifles as part of a well regulated militia. Whose or which regulations are these disparate militia groups willing to follow? I don't know of any of these militias that are NOT on the Southern Poverty Law Center list of hate groups.
Look to the armed standoff that just ended in Burns, Oregon to see how these types of weapons of War were used. The fighting or threatening of law enforcement in order to continue an unlawful occupation of a government facility was "DOMESTIC TERRORISM" as well. Even though they're not charged with it, I'm sure that many people felt that they should have been.
So again the question remains, why are there weapons like these in the hands of civilians? Why is websites such as armslist.com and other online weapons and ammo sellers allowed to offer large caliber, high velocity guns that also take magazines that can hold from 30 rounds to 200 rounds and sell them as well? They can also fire 180 rounds per minute before needing to change the magazine while in the semi-auto mode. The shooter in the Aurora, Colorado movie theater massacre James Holmes, had an AR15 assault rifle with a 100 round magazine in addition to his shotgun, pistol and tear gas when he was killing the innocent family members who were out to see the new Batman movie. It had jammed while he was murdering those people or the death toll would have been much higher.
This type of weaponry should only be used on a field of battle. Or they can be used by psychotic individuals to cause great harm. At present there are no limits on the number of magazines or the amount of ammunition that can be held or purchased by any civilian.
James Holmes also had a massive armory built up in his apartment over the course of a few months. It was said he had spent in excess of $15,000 online to purchase thousands of rounds of ammunition, body armor, gunpowder and fuses for bomb making. The booby traps he set up could have at the least blown out the walls of his and the surrounding apartments and maybe worse.
www.cbsnews.com/...
The married terrorist couple in the recent ISIS inspired attack in San Bernardino had 2 assault rifles that were modified to use larger magazines that were against California law. Did it do any good for these military grade weapons to be against California law when every state that borders the golden state doesn't have the same law? They also had a very large armory built up as well. 4,500 extra rounds of bullets, pipe bombs rigged with remote detonaters and more bomb making materials. They need to focus on how to prevent others who are here getting the same type of an armory built instead of how they can get access to millions of other American citizens data so they can continue to spy on us. Not to mention the untold millions of other IPhone users around the world.
www.dailymail.co.uk/...
However you want to look at the mass shootings in the United States, no one can deny that the frequency and amount of victims from them are going up. No matter how much people want to argue over the size of the magazine for any particular gun, no reasonable human being can deny that the number of bullets in a gun has a direct effect on the number of people that can be killed by it.
In 1934 the National Firearms Act was passed. This was in response to the use of machine guns used by the gangsters during prohibition. Law enforcement didn't have them because of their high cost but the gangsters did. That didn't work out too well in trying to bring them to justice. There were a few exceptions to this, one being the killing of Bonnie and Clyde and the Dillinger gang.
In 1968 the Gun Control Act was passed in response to the assassinations of JFK, RFK and MLK and it sailed thru both chambers of Congress and was signed into law.
In 1972 the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms was formed. Then the Law Enforcement Protection Act.
Then in 1986 the advances we had made to protect the American people were starting to be rolled back with the passage of the Firearms Owner Protection Act. This eased the restrictions on the weapons and ammunition industry and they continued to be eased on all firearms. The one exception was an ammendment added to it concerning new machine guns.
Then in 1994 we had the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act aka the assault weapons ban passed. But the NRA pushed back and it was only good for 10 years but the gun culture had already been kicked into gear with higher sums of money spent by the NRA to purchase or intimidate politicians.
The US weapons and ammunition industry has an annual revenue of $13.5 billion dollars with a profit of $1.5 billion dollars each year.
The NRA collects dues from its members for a total of $256 million dollars per year. The NRA spends on Washington lobbyists $298 million dollars per year. There are no hard numbers that I could find on the NRA money spent on political races for federal, state or local elections and the untold other pro NRA programs. The hidden numbers are how much the guns and ammo industries "donate" to the NRA.
Who would you think that the NRA allegiance would lie with? It's members that they are a negative $42 million dollars each year or the undeclared amount that pays the hundreds of millions of dollars in operating costs?
That's an unfair rhetorical question that any 10 year old kid could answer ;-) Who would you choose?
www.infoplease.com/...
So far we haven't had a mass shooting that would shock the American people so bad that the politicians would have no choice but to pass some extremely draconian law as a reaction. How much longer will our luck hold with the alienation of Muslims exhibited by the leaders on the right and parroted by a growing and louder segment of the American public?
