The name of the Boulder, Colorado, shooter, Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, is interesting. He's 21years old and was taken into custody after he was shot during a shootout with police after "allegedly" killing 10, including a police officer, and wounding numerous others. Neither police nor the media are reporting any other details about him, nor a possible motive. Was this an Islamic extremist attack? (Apparently it is now being reported he may be a Syrian terrorist.) It is believed he lived in this country most of his life but then, so did the Tzarnaev brothers.
The most interesting thing, but not surprising, is the immediate renewed calls for increased gun control before any of these facts have been released. How did the shooter acquire the gun? Did it belong to him, his father, a friend? Was it given to him? Was it stolen? We don't know any of that yet. But hey - increased gun control would have stopped the incident, right?
In today's society I really have no problem with background checks for criminal history or serious mental health history before someone is approved to purchase a firearm, although unless there are documented changes I see no point in doing them every single time a new one is purchased. If I bought a gun six months ago and there or no changes to my background check in a simple NICS search I shouldn't be required to do the entire thing again.
I have neither a criminal nor serious mental health history. (OK... there are those who might question that second one..... LOL) And I have no problem with revealing that fact to authorities. I know, I know... "Second Amendement doesn't say".... but if a background check prevents a mass murderer from legally purchasing a gun and killing someone I can live with that.
Do those background checks work every time - catch everyone with criminal or mental heath histories? Nope. Are there ways around them? Yep. Unfortunately, most gun control measures are aimed at law-abiding citizens who easily pass background checks and mental health screenings rather than criminals and psychiatric patients. Let's face it, in this country anyone who wants a gun can get one. It just depends on how hard he or she wants to work at it.
I'm fed up with the left, from politicians to the media and on down, referring to semiautomatic rifles as "assault rifles." No, "AR" does not stand for Assault Rifle. It stands for Armalite Rifles, the company that made the first AR-15. To believe otherwise is simple gun ignorance. AR-15s are designed to look like a military rifle but with significant exceptions - its looks and gas powered operating system - it is nothing like a real military weapon. Military weapons can be set to fire more than one bullet with each trigger pull. You can fire single rounds, three round bursts, and fully automatic, which allows for hundreds of rounds to be fired in seconds with jyst twonor three trigger pulls. AR-15s cannot do that without modification. Modification can be done, both legally and illegally, but legal modifications can be done only after paying money to the government. Imagine that.
Like the new Covid Relief Bill, new gun control measures are designed more to make money for the government than to save lives. Think about it. There are millions of legal gun owners in this country who every day don't shoot anyone. They own handguns, shotguns, traditional rifles, AR-15s, etc, most with "high capacity magazines," (meaning it holds over 10 rounds) and those people regularly do mot shoot nor kill anyone every single day.
A few years back the left-wing media came up with the term "assault rifle" to describe the AR-15 after one was used in a mass shooting. Liberals ran with the nomenclature and today most people on the left, including politicians, use it to describe the AR-15. It's scary looking because it resembles a military weapon. But it doesn't function like a military weapon. Yet no one seems interested in that simple and important truth.
A few years ago a left-wing columnist wrote an article about firing an AR-15, about how its recoil damaged his shoulder, the blast sounded like cannon fire and the overall experience left him with Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. If was quite clear he made up the story, particularly after just days later another, a real journalist interviewed a child shooting champion who wins AR-15 competitions on a regular basis and has never experienced these problems. I think she was ten at the time.
In reality, any weapon used to commit murder is an "assault weapon." For Cain it was a rock. For those who killed Ceasar it was knives. For Timothy McVeigh it was a kerosene and fertilizer. And for the 9/11 terrorists it was airliners. Should we ban all of those, or perhaps only the ones that look scary?
The Biden administration wants all Americans to register their firearms with the government. They want to buy back (confiscate) "assault weapons." Those who refuse to sell their guns to the government and keep them will be forced to register them and pay "special taxes" for that right. The tax will be $200 per weapon, per year. In addition, Biden wants to make every gun owner pay a $100 tax on every high capacity magazine (holds over 30 rounds.) Most AR-15s come from the store or factory with at least two 30 round magazines. So if you want to buy a new AR-15 It would cost you a $300 additional tax to the government over and above the goverment sales tax.
Senator Diane Feinstein recently introduced a bill to ban assault weapons ((AR, AK, etc., and handguns) that use detachable ammunition introduction equipment [magazines] and particularly high capacity magazines. That would pretty much ban at least half of rifles and semiautomatic pistols in the country.
I don't know anyone who owns an AR-15 or other semiautomatic rifle (or pistol) who owns only one magazine. Shooting enthusiasts like to shoot but don't like reloading to interfere with that. They'd rather take a large number of loaded magazines to the range or hunting sight rather than sit around and reload magazines while they're having fun.
The Biden administration wants to tax individuals $100 for each and every high capacity magazine they own including handguns, shotguns, andand rifles. Fox many gun owners in this country that would entail exorbitant amounts of money. Or lies.
Every one of these measures is meant to harm and control legal gun owners, not criminal activities. Do you really believe new laws are designed to, or will prevent criminals and crazy people from acquiring and using firearms? Why didn't it stop the Sandy Hook shooter, who had a psychiatric history but who killed his mother and stole her legally owned AR-15?
Gun control is about control of the masses and revenue for the government, period. If it's about saving lives why has the government not cracked down on illegal guns and illegal shootings in our major cities rather than targeting legal gun owners.? These and suicides are the prmary causes of gun deaths in this country. Why is the government not pushing mental health treatment in this country? As far as I'm concerned, anyone, terrorist or not, who can go somewhere and wantonly kill large numbers of innocent people who have done nothing to them is mentally ill. Let's try to solve the real issues rather than create more.
No comments:
Post a Comment