Friday, December 21, 2012



Workin on text for a letter to congress critters here and DC ...figured i would post it here for suggestions. Keep in mind, I have no illusions that my prose will sway the masses or even the moderate statist. but at this point, I have three options....shut up and watch, write, call and or march.....or well we will leave the third option unsaid. I can not be held accountable for what I don't say can I! Since I am real bad at being silent.....this is my chosen action.....and so here goes. Feel free to feed back, I reserve the right to monitor/not publish comments, it is after all my blog:

Dear Congressman,

We are all to familiar with the tragedy in Connecticut. Since that day, there has been a rash of emotion and a lack of common sense.

In spite of the progressive media, I urge you to stand with me and millions of gun owners and protect the right to own and bear arms. And that includes all types of weapons, regardless of there cosmetic features, caliber, or magazine size.

Newtown, where all the laws in the world didn't matter and wouldn't have.  Even when he was denied a firearm because of the back ground check system, he still acquired a firearms through murder and theft. He then committed a break and entry to gain access. He followed that with assault with a deadly weapon and then even more murder.  Had there been a ban on the number of rounds in any weapon, he still had more than one stolen firearm, so that would have been a waste of ink as well.

Theft, assault, murder are all illegal and the crimes of a madman. Had he not had firearms, his madness would have still been intact, still a force to be expressed. He was intent on killing and so he determined there would be death. No law would have an impact. He could have used bladed weapons as was used in China recently, fire/explosives as used in the largest school killing in america or in Oklahoma several years ago, or perhaps just a stolen vehicle.

Making more laws is not the answer and restricting firearms to people who chose to own them for protection is just as criminal. Creating defenseless places and not allowing people to defend themselves is no less than putting innocents into a firing squad. Firearms are part of real life. Even in the nations with strict restrictions, they exist illegally in great numbers. Gun free zones are a myth.

Regarding the the noise about assault weapons. That is a list of cosmetic features. The use of the term assault weapon is used to give some false premise of evil to an inanimate object. There is no functional difference in these weapons. They neither fire faster or fire a more lethal round than many “sporting” rifles or shotguns. Would it have been better if the children were killed with a long barrel 12 gauge shotgun? Of course not. In fact, had the weapon been a shotgun, the results would have been more gruesome and in Aurora, more extensive.

Yet, the effect of limiting assult rifles if it were to be successful (and I doubt it would be) could have just that impact. Steal the ole’ man’s shotgun, cut it off and bingo...the madman or criminal has a short lethal weapon. Illegal, yes of course. The BATF has all kinds of regulations to make that a crime. But what’s the point when it is only another crime in the middle of so many others!
But honestly, with the ATF/FBI supplying military grade weapons to evry terrorist/narco-gang in the world, the chance of forearms becoming the next illegal Mexican re-import is just a matter of time.

So lets address high capacity magazines. The fact that there are more than one, or ten, or any number is a red herring. Limit the size of mags and the criminals will simply carry more magazines all of which are made to rapidly exchange. Or perhaps more weapons which has been true in both Newtown and Aurora recently. And again, if the crime is murder, do you think the black market will not supply any number of high capacity mags. They are not that difficult to manufacture. For heavens sake, the narco gangs build submarines! Magazines and even guns are a snap if there is a market. On the other hand, more rounds makes it easier for defense as well as offense. The equalizer effect.

As for what americans really think, you need look no farther than WalMart. The sales of firearms there and throughout the continent are off the charts. People want to be able to defend themselves. People will defend themselves.  They are voting on this issue with there actions. They are spending what limited resources there are in this economically difficult time on firearms and ammo.

The government does not have the moral authority to tell me or anyone how to defend or not defend my self or my family. Most especially when that same government is trading with and up-arming the very gangs that roam our streets. It is an ironic fact that the forces who want this nation disarmed are the vary nations we are at economic or virtual war with, Mexico, Russia, China, Iran, Europe. Equally ironic that what we fought wars over in the 20th century was our way of life which included the right of armed self defense.  All of those countries disallowed their citizens firearms. So,, who do you side with, our past and current enemies or loyal americans who are now arming themselves now.

So, summary; I will not be disarmed, I and my family will not be left defenseless, we will retain our birthright. I urge you to stand with me, my family and millions of others....protect the nations birthright to armed individual self defense, at all costs.

 


1 comment: