Gun regulation is not at all about the safety of children or innocent people in America. But instead it is the impulse of people who believe that, since the government is the answer to nearly all problems, government should have all the guns in order to protect us. Gun control is also the impulse of all dictators, tyrants, and power mongers who desire to control large groups of people without fear of reprisal.
If the preservation of innocent life were the main point, a logical person would look at all the factors in our society which lead to the damage of innocent life and work to systematically eliminate them. In truth these factors can never be eliminated, so society strives for a balance between a safety which preserves and protects life, and a freedom that makes life worth living.
The current drive toward gun regulation is clearly not about safety. For instance, according to a report by the Center for Disease Control, the year 2010 saw 11,078 homicides by firearm (The FBI states the number to be 8,874) . The same year saw 25,692 alcohol induced deaths (not including vehicular homicide), and 40,393 drug induced deaths. Another report by the national Highway Traffic Safety Administration indicates that in 2010 a total of 10,228 people died because of alcohol-impaired driving. Of those killed, 211 were children under age 14. Deaths from alcohol related vehicle accidents nearly equal or exceed homicides by firearm.
While there may be a so called “war on drugs”, very little if anything is said about alcohol. No one is crying out to the president and congress for stiffer laws and regulations on alcohol. We like our drink. The laws for obtaining guns are similar to those for obtaining alcohol. In most states a person must be at least 21 year of age and show valid ID. To obtain a handgun one must submit to a background check. Some may argue that we already have many valid laws on the books to deal with alcohol and therefore more laws are not needed, but the same may be said for guns.
The Children’s Defense Fund produced a report of gun violence and deaths for 2008. According to their statistics, there were 2,947 children and teen firearm fatalities in 2008. That sounds like a really big number, however when we break down the numbers we see that 2,571 of those fatalities were teens 15-19 years of age. Only 408 were under age 15, and 148 under 10. We ought to lament the death of every single person, but not every death is equally tragic and not every person killed is equally innocent. A significantly high number of those 2,571 deaths in 15-19 year olds could be attributed to gang warfare in major cities.
Quoting from a 2012 report from the Center for Disease Control, “Gang homicides account for a substantial proportion of homicides among youths in some U.S. cities” and “consistent with similar previous research, a higher proportion of gang homicides than other homicides involved young adults and adolescents, racial and ethnic minorities, and males. (emphasis added).
I have recently read that approximately 71% of homicides involve criminals killing criminals. (Sorry, but I can’t find the source for that. I’ll update this later when I find it.) When teenage criminals kill each other through gang warfare or other crimes, it is not appropriate to include these statistics among statistics about death to innocent children by firearms.
The current battle cry is for a ban on assault rifles and to limit all guns to between 7 and 10 rounds of ammunition. Few people are admitting that they ultimately desire to ban all guns. They say that they are in favor of people having guns in order to protect themselves and for legitimate hunting and sport.
FBI statistics show that of the 13,164 non-vehicular homicides in 2010, firearms were involved 8,874 cases. Handguns accounted for 6,115 of these deaths, but rifles only accounted for 367 deaths. Most of those 6,115 deaths by handgun probably did not involve shooting more than 10 rounds. It has been reported that most cases of shootings involve less than five shots. So we must face the reality that if the government enacted the assault rifle ban and the ban of magazines holding more than 10 rounds, crime statistics would remain virtually unchanged.
The assault weapon ban is not about protecting innocent life. It must be about something else and I think I know that it is. It is actually about two things:
1) Convincing the masses that they should not be self-dependent and self-responsible, but instead rely on the government for everything, including personal protection. For the masses it is about feeling safe because only the government have the guns.
2) A major step toward removing government’s fear of the people. The American founders believed that the government needed to fear the people and the people needed the right to keep and bear arms in order to instill that fear.
Recent world history shows that in the 20th century alone over 100 million people were massacred by their own governments. These governments used everything from starvation (USSR), to gas chambers (Germany), to death marches (Turkey), to assassinations and riots. The common thread through all the large massacres of the 20th century is that the people had been previously disarmed.
I’m not suggesting that the US government will conduct a massacre anytime in the immediate future. There are too many guns already in the hands of the people. If they tried the result would be colossal death, but it would be in the form of civil war. However, I am suggesting that after the systematic regulating, licensing, and restricting of guns for a period of years, our government could eventually confiscate all guns – at least all the guns they could find. I am also suggesting that the world can change mighty quickly and that within a very short number of years, say 10 years, the U.S. could see mass killings by a runaway government.
Whatever way the phrase “well regulated militia” is interpreted from the 2nd amendment, one thing is clear, the founders original intent was that the people be armed in such a way as to conduct warfare against invading nations, insurrectionists, or if necessary, their own government. To pass laws or decree executive orders limiting the ability of the people to do so is a clear violation of the natural meaning and obvious intent of the founders in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and other writings.
Watch this excellent video.