Concealed Carry

5 Top Gun Control Myths

The term “assault rifle” was hardly ever used, even in the military, until the 1980s.

Whether you believe the anti gunners are uninformed, misinformed, or simply dishonest brokers of the facts, there are still a few gun control myths that are mind boggling to the point you’d wonder how they can even exist at all. In this top 5 list, The Shooter’s Log will cover the ones we considered the wackiest, however, you are free to disagree or pile on a few favorites of your own.

The term “assault rifle” was hardly ever used, even in the military, until the 1980s.
The term “assault rifle” was hardly ever used, even in the military, until the 1980s.

1. “Assault Rifle” Myth

Most likely, the hair on the back of your necks stands up every time a politician or newscaster improperly uses the term assault rifle to describe a modern sporting rifle. The difference between an assault rifle and semi-automatic AR-15 is as obvious as the difference between the version of a car you go to down to the local dealer to purchase and it namesake making laps in NASCAR race. The body style is similar, but under the hood is what counts, not the cosmetics or name.

The misuse of the term assault rifle, in part lead to the Assault Weapons Ban (AWB), formally called the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, a subsection of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which effectively blocked the sale of of several different semi-automatic firearms in an effort to reduce the crime rate. While it is true that violent crime and the murder rate did fall during the 10 years the AWB, the violent crime was falling before the AWB.  The violent crime rate has also consistently went down across the nation since the expiration of the AWB. Remember, simply because there is a correlation during a specific time period, does not mean there is a causal link. For example, more ice cream is sold during the months of June, July, and August than other months. June, July, and August also have the highest murder rates. That is a correlation but does not mean reducing ice creams sales would reduce the murder rate.

Since the expiration of the AWB, firearm ownership, AR-15s, and concealed carry numbers have both skyrocketed. Yet, the murder rate and violent crime rate have both continued to drop. Again, that is a correlation and not a causal link, so we cannot prove an increase in concealed carry has lowered the violent crime rate, but we can empirically show private ownership of more firearms and an increased number of citizens carrying firearms has not increased the violent crime rate.

In the 14 years since the previous ban lapsed, even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference. The number of people murdered in the U.S. with any type of rifle has been less than 300 per year, nevermind the so-called “assault rifle.”

Scott Wagner standing in front of a car door with a Smith and Wesson .38 Bodyguard pistol
Which one would you say was easier to get, the firearm or driver’s license?

The continuing focus on these so-called assault weapons stems from the politicians and the media’s obsessive attempts to vilify the AR-15. This, in turn, obscures some grim truths about who is really dying from gunshots and the fact that your are about 20 times more likely to be shot with a handgun, even odds with a shotgun, several times more likely to be killed with a blunt object, knife, or hands, feet, fists or being pushed.

2. Myth: It’s Easier to Get a Gun Than a Driver’s License

The myth is silly on its face and all around, a poor comparison. I would say it’s like apples and oranges, but at least those are both fruits. Getting a gun versus a driver’s license is more a akin to comparing an apple and foot massage. However, the anti gunners picked it, so let’s do the comparison.

  1. You do not have a Constitutional right to drive.
  2. You have to have a driver’s license or some other state issued ID—usually more difficult to obtain— because you have to prove residency to purchase a firearm.
  3. Even people in New York who do not own a car and regularly use public transportation can still get a driver’s license.
  4. Convicted felons can get a driver’s license.
  5. A federal background check is not required to get a driver’s license.
  6. The mentally ill may get a driver’s license, although there are some restrictions in some states.
  7. Those convicted of domestic abuse can get a driver’s license.
  8. You can get a driver’s license, or permit, at a younger age than a firearm. In fact, there is nothing to say you even have to have a driver’s license to legally buy or own a motor vehicle.

Do we really need to go on? Apples and foot massages—not even close.

3. Myth: Guns Only Have One Purpose: To Kill

Eric Hollen seated in his wheel chair shooting a competition pistol.
“The sport of shooting helps me live in the moment. There comes a peace during practice, all the blunders made, failures past, accidents, injuries and nerve pain all are momentarily gone.” ~Eric Hollen.

Hunting and target shooting aside, a great analogy is to compare carrying a firearm to driving a car. A gun can be carried for self-defense, but never employed. Passively carrying a firearm puts everyone around you at exactly zero risk. However, every time someone gets behind the wheel, they are actively engaging an instrument that kills many, many more people than guns each year, and the act of using the car is intentional not passive. However, we call crashes accidents for a reason—even when the driver was negligent. We blame the person for texting or the driver for being drunk, not the car or even the alcohol manufacturer. By comparison, even though you may carry a loaded firearm, statistics show that legally carrying firearms for self-defense (we are not talking about those intent on doing harm) is far less likely to result in the loss of life than driving a motor vehicle. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 2016 data shows 37,461 people in the U.S. were killed in 34,436 motor vehicle crashes, an average of 102 per day. That far outpaces the number of people murdered by firearms each years.

4. Gun-Free Zones

Since 2009, over 90% of mass shootings have, sadly, occured in gun free zones. I understand, even if I do not necessarily approve of, why certain areas are restricted from firearms. The courthouse is an example, but with a major difference. The courtroom has a significant armed presence in, and around, it. While many would still favor to exercise their right to take responsibility for their own safety, perhaps there is room to pass that responsibility on law enforcement. Other areas, simply because there is a security guard on the premises, does not meet the same standards. A few security guards at a mall, it is not sufficient to protect the patrons.

This is really common sense. Use any analogy you’d like. If you want to catch a fish, you go where there are a lot of fish without a lot of competition. Gun-free zones are typically well populated and the law abiding are, by definition, typically unarmed in a gun-free zone. On and off duty law enforcement would be an exception of course. And thankfully, there are plenty of stories where an off duty or plain clothes LEO was able to draw their weapon and thwart a potential tragedy, but when it comes to gun-free zones, this is a minority rather than a majority of circumstances. However, eliminate the gun-free zones and the chances of an armed citizen being able to intervene becomes much higher.

U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo and Steven Jett hold up a sign reading "This is Not a Gun-Free Zone"
Greenleaf, Idaho city councilman Steven Jett poses with U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo.

5. Concealed Carry Does Not Thwart Violent Crime or Make Us Safer

There are hundreds of times a month, week, day, that concealed carry prevents a violent crime. The stories are in the news every day across the entire country. Sure, the ones where the concealed carrier was forced to shoot may make the headlines, but what about the times where the presence of the firearm was enough to turn the tide without someone getting shot? I remember, as a teenager, when my sister was home alone and a subcontractor of my father’s construction business came pounding on the door, drunk and threatening to burn the house down. Fortunately, while my sister was not a physical match for the burly construction worker, she had the presence of mind to run to a closet and grab a rifle. The man was drunk, but not suicidal and quickly retreated to his car at the sight of her peering through the window with a .22 LR rifle. He returned the next day with flowers and a big apology. How often do situations such as this happen, but are not reported?

I am sure  many of you who are savvy and keep up with the gun control debate realize the mistake I made at the beginning of the last paragraph. I put hundreds of times a day. Even the CDC’s own report, a handful of years ago, estimated the number of times a firearm in the U.S. is used defensively to be between 500,000 and 3 million times a year due to underreporting! That means thousands of times a day, not hundreds…

Do you agree with arguments against these gun control myths? Which gun control myths top your personal list? Share your answers in the comment section.

[dave]

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (48)

  1. Another active shooter, more lost lives due to our gun control laws.
    So Imagine that, a former student walks into a school where teachers, principals nor security guards are able to legally defend the lives of the innocent or their own.
    Of course people died. Of course they did. Why wouldn’t they? He wanted to kill them, so he did.

    So if assault rifles were illegal this would have never happened right? Even better, what if all guns were illegal. What if murder was illegal? Wow we could really put an end to this with laws.

    (Picture courtesy of Govtech.com and TNS)

    Yeah that seems reasonable, the criminally insane person or criminal that admitted to doing this would never use another type of rifle, gun, improvised explosive device, fire, vehicle, baseball bat, lead pipe, kitchen knife or any other type of weapon to do what he wanted to do. The only way to kill is with a gun right?

    Wake up people, all your bantering about guns is only making more crazies want to copy cat this. STOP THE BS. Ask your democratic lawmakers to pass laws that allow teachers and security guards to become trained and defend the lives of the innocent. Better yet make it mandatory for schools to have a certain amount of people per number of students, trained and always carrying concealed. Make it public, make it known that all schools, university’s and churches are no longer the soft targets that the criminally insane want to test. Its really that simple. Make it harder for crimes to be committed and less crimes will be committed.

    Now, I know there are some of you reading this that are thinking “yes exactly, get rid of guns and make it harder for people to do this”. Be honest with yourself, is an amendment to the constitution going to make criminals disappear from the face of the earth? Is it going to make someone that is insane all of a sudden sane? NO.

    What all the banter will do, is waste a bunch of time that could be spent training the right people that are necessary to make criminals think twice about what they are wanting to do. This guy scoped out the school, told people he was going to do it, showed all the signs of a whackjack, and yet no one could stop him. REALLY……? You want to know why?

    Because our country is too politically correct. I’m sure the kids at school (trained by their parents) didn’t want to offend anyone by saying anything like “hey that emo guy over there with no friends is crazy and said he was going to kill people”. Oh my we dont want to stereotype people or judge a book by its cover. That’s not nice. No, you know whats not nice, getting shot at. “You cant just go around profiling people, I’m sure hes a nice person and just needs some people to be nice to him. F That. Simply put F that. PROFILE ALL DAY and stay ahead of the threats. If you hurt someones feelings, at least that’s all that got hurt. So there’s that.

    There aren’t people trained to notice the signs. If he was already expelled, what was he doing in the school etc… There was also multiple other tell tale signs that were ignored, he even posted a youtube comment saying he was going to become a professional school shooter.

    There is no security presence at a soft target location. Lack of individuals with command presence or the ability to defend. NO SHEEPDOGS.

    Now if he had seen a security guard or known that someone carried concealed there, he may have selected another target. But instead he knew the opposite and banked on it just like every other active shooter situation there has been and will be.

    This is the idiotic world we live in, get used to it, change the way you think and defend our freedoms and our right to protect ourselves. Innocent lives could have been saved by people with the right training who were onsite far before the first responding officers arrived.

    Our lack of passing laws making it mandatory for schools to have armed and trained people on staff that are there every day is going to cost us greatly as a nation. It could even be seen as negligence in the court of law at this point. Wake up and smell the threat people.

    -RB

  2. Doesn’t anyone read comments before they respond? I said I have first hand knowledge of a person buying a firearm at a gun show and absolutely no identification was shown and no forms filled out. I never said it was legal or I approved. I am just stating a fact. Steve, I am sorry you don’t believe me. Better take a look at armslist.com also.

  3. Let’s be careful when we talk about shootings in Chicago. I was born and raised on the south side of Chicago. Outside of the gang related killings in a small area of Chicago, it is one of the safest cities n the country.
    One of the reasons for all the shootings is that you are required to shoot and or kill someone to join a gangs. The police are stymied because there are never any witnesses. Everything changed when stop and frisk became illegal.

  4. Hey Dennis! I can go to almost any street corner in the US and get almost anything I want…..so what is your point?

    I dare say that even though there are lawbreakers in every group of people in the world, gun owners by far are nowhere near the top of the list.

  5. Trust me, you can go to almost any gun show and buy a firearm WITHOUT a background check. Not all people at gun shows are dealers. There are individuals selling guns. I have first hand knowledge of this.

    1. And this is called breaking the law Dennis! A prime example of how gun control laws do little to sway illegal means of obtaining a gun.

    2. Dennis Patyk, and Charles
      You both need to be corrected, only deales are required to submit a form 4473 not private individuals. Private sales have been legal for years, but with the latest push of prohibited persons trying to get guns it has become highly advisable to anyone wishing to sell a gun privately to get the drivers license information or better yet sell only to ccw holders. Why? To cover their own butt. Criminals generally speaking don’t like leaving a paper trail and making it easier for law enforcement to find them and asking for id is a deterrent just for the chance that the seller wants to make absolutely sure that the buyer can own a gun.

    3. You are technically correct, although a study a while back showed that only about 1% of criminals interviewed in prison admitted they had bought a gun at a gun show. I’ve worked an Oath Keepers public relations table at a number of gun shows. Typically the “dealers” you are talking about sell something else, ie., first aid supplies, knives, camping gear, etc. and will have a gun or two from a personal collection, more often than not collector guns, and rarely guns that would be used in a mass shooting. In fact I’m not aware of any gun used in a mass shooting that was bought at a gun show, and the media would most certainly report it if it had occurred.

    4. I have bought several guns at gun shows in Texas. I was ALWAYS asked to show my drivers license (a first-tier background check). It is federal law that they can neither sell to somebody from out of state, nor to underage, or non-citizens. If you were right, then Californians (who have an approved bun list) could simply cross state lines and buy whatever guns they wanted at whatever shows they could attend. They cannot- I’ve seen them try. AND THE ONE TIME when I mentioned I was buying a clip for a friend from California, the stand (properly) refused to sell it to me.
      Learn your facts

  6. These are all good fact-based rebuttals. However, those who would ban gun ownership are operating from emotion and are not swayed by facts or logical arguments. Try asking them:

    “Do you honestly believe that someone bent on violence will obey any gun law? Do you think their obtaining a gun will be thwarted by any gun law?”.

    “Do you think they will obey ‘Gun Free Zone’ signs?
    And please remember, when you see a “Gun Free Zone’ sign, anyone bent on violence, sees a ‘Defenseless Victim Zone’ sign.”

    “Does banning guns make it harder for the perpetrator of violence or harder for the victims to defend themselves against the perpetrator?”
    “Why do you want to make it harder for the victims of violence?”
    “Do you want people to be able to successfully defend themselves against violence?”

    1. Like sheep voting to ban the wolf… I’d rather have an armed sheepdog out there than pretend banning the wolf would work.

  7. I greatly appreciate the article by Dave Dolbee on “5 Top Gun Control Myths”, especially being written so soon after the horrific shooting in Florida this week. The liberal press/progressive politicians have already jumped on that shooting to advocate more “common sense gun control” laws. So good to see CTD not afraid to publish a “common sense” article explaining the mindless rants against our 2nd Amendment liberties and gun ownership. Keep it up; don’t back off!

  8. Dave, your article here about gun control (whatever that really is) is quite good, and very timely with the school massacre in FL just recently. My point of view is that we have a serious social problem in his country, and people think it is fine to take their anger out by killing those that supposedly wronged them (such as in FL), or strangers (as in Las Vegas).

    There are several issues that should be addressed, but other than banning certain guns (or all of them), many of steps can be taken to really reduced this ‘epidemic’. How are all these mass murders getting their weapons? How did a 19 year get them? How did the LV shooter get the parts to make his AR-15 fully automatic?

    Furthermore, what are the penalties for killing in mass like what just happened in FL. What are the penalties for those that either gave him the weapons or sold then to him? What are his parent penalties?

    I am an owner of two Ruger Blackhawk single action revolvers (not the sort of weapon anyone would take to a mass killing) and believe in the 2nd Amendment wholly, but I would never base my politics on this issue. I am a fairly liberal person, but I am behind gun ownership completely. I remember going to the outdoor shooting range with my two revolvers, and firing next to a person with a .50 cal. rifle, and the volume and concussion each time he fired was so great, I had to move down about 8 or so lanes! It must have been a blast to shoot it! And then another time someone had a 300 Win Mag and I had to move away again! sometimes I have to move just because I am getting hit by the ejected casings, which my guns do not do at all.

    It has been a lot of fun to see all these people with many types of rifles and handguns at the range and talk to them as well. Some have let me shoot their weapon, and I have let some shoot mine, especially the .45 LC single action revolver with a very hot load (from Buffalo Bore).

    I do have a friend who is very much a die-hard Democrat, and naturally anti-gun. I sent her your article, to try to put some sense into her anti- gun feelings, which I think your article does quite nicely. But, like abortion, gun control has become more of an emotional issue, and what steps I think that should be taken or seriously considered are not done or even discussed at all. all I hear is take ‘that gun away’ vs.’ don’t take any guns away’.

    Thanks again for your article.

    Vincent (02-17-2018)

    1. With respect, the LV shooter did not obtain parts that made his AR-15 “fully automatic.” He used a bumpfire-typed stock that takes advantage of the inherent recoil characteristics of the AR. No one knows what will happen in the future but until now the government did not consider the bumpfire stocks as something that would convert an AR-15 to full auto.

  9. Let’s use history to teach us something. They banned alcohol and it created speakeasy’s and generated millions of dollars to crime. Drugs are illegal yet in every state there is drug problems. No gang member previously arrested legally purchases guns but the majority if not all of them have them. There are laws In place to prevent murder of any kind and yet it still happens. The simple truth is the only laws that are not broken are by those following the laws to begin with and are not the reason the laws are put in place to begin with. We do have A serious problem with the youth of today. Instead of thinking of what laws to put in place to prevent it that they will just ignore anyway and instead we should be focused on what type of help we can offer to those reaching that level of life where they consider breaking the law is worth it. We need to make sure the laws we have are being followed and enforced. Don’t ban the gun, but if a criminal is convicted and uses a gun to commit a crime stop slapping them on the hand and letting them out.

    1. The other point is that Chicago is practically a gun-free zone and yet, it has one of the largest rates of gun crimes in the country.

  10. A myth you didn’t address:
    That it’s illegal to concealed carry in any building marked with a “no gun” or “gun free zone” sign.

    Fact: The only “gun free zones” that have to be abided by are federal and state buildings.

    Otherwise, there’s no legal recourse for a concealed carry permit holder to carry concealed in any building. They can legally ask you to leave if they realize you’re packing, (and if they do you must comply), but otherwise, there’s no legal recourse.

  11. You guys are focused on the wrong thing. You are just repeating the same crap everyone else does. The concern is mass shootings and high powered rifles. The real issue is that if we ban high powered rifles, the shooters will just use shotguns and pistols (just like Columbine and V Tech). So do we ban those next? Once we do that, what next? In all of that, we still haven’t fixed the problem. The VT shooter used a 9mm and a .22. People intent on killing will find a way to kill. Do we honestly think that we will get even a small percentage of the illegal guns that are out there? That’s like saying we honestly expect to get rid of all the illegal aliens. So once again, we have done nothing but deprive people of their rights and we have done nothing but make ourselves feel better. We need real solutions to the REAL problems.

  12. I don’t know that it’s a myth so much as a self-fulfilling prophesy; the idea that the AR-15 is the weapon of choice in most mass shootings and, as a result, must be banned. The reason it’s the weapon of choice for most mass shooters is because it’s been glamorized by the media and entertainment industries, comprised of the very people who are most in favor of banning it. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might even say it sounds intentional. As an interview in USA Today noted the other day:

    “Dean Hazen, owner of The Gun Experts in Mahomet, Ill., and a master firearms instructor, said the reason mass shooters are turning to the AR-15 is due to a “copy-cat” mentality more than any feature of the rifle.

    “It’s really just a perception thing,” Hazen said. “There are rifles that are more powerful and more dangerous than that, but they’re not being used.”

    Hazen said the AR-15 has “gotten a bad rap.” He believes mass shooters generally don’t know much about guns and choose the AR-15 because of the reputation it has gotten from being used in other mass shootings.

    “Thank God they don’t know any better because if they did they would use much more effective weapons,” Hazen said.”

    1. Due to a sensitivity to recent events, I had to modify this article to avoid talking about certain topics. However, this link will lead you to a chart showing the AR-15 is far from the “weapon of choice.” The media and politicians trying to score points focus on it quite heavily though in an attempt to highlight it. However, in practice, it is in the minority. In fact, all the numbers for all rifles is roughly equal to shotguns, less than handguns, edged weapons, blunt weapons, or hands, feet, fists or being pushed. https://www.statista.com/statistics/476409/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-weapon-types-used ~Dave Dolbee

    2. That may be the case in all mass shootings going back to 1982 as the chart shows, but of the 5 worst mass shootings, including Las Vegas, Orland Pulse Nightclub, Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook, and First Baptist Church Sutherland Springs, TX, only Virginia Tech did not involve an AR-15. My point was not to disparage the AR-15, (I own one) just to point out that the media goes to extra lengths to both glamorize and demonize it. When was the last time you heard a news report of a mass shooting where an “assault” pistol was used?

  13. It is not easier to obtain a concealed gun permit than a drivers license without question. However the right to drive is no less a constitutional right than the right to keep and bear arms. The constitution states that we have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.Try doing that in this day and age. How many people in the US have to use a car to get to workK

    1. The right to drive IS NOT in the constitution, the right to bear arms IS. Relating the right to drive to the pursuit of happiness is nonsense. To give an extreme example of your incorrect analogy. Some people love to rob banks. Are you saying robbing banks, for these people, is a constitutional right under the “pursuit of happiness” clause?

    2. Actually, the constitution does NOT guarantee the “right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Those words are in the Declaration of Independence. Courts have repeatedly upheld that driving is a PRIVILEGE which must be EARNED (usually by proving proficiency and physical ability) and which may be revoked for reasons of lawbreaking (e.g., driving while intoxicated) or for medical reasons.

    3. There is NO “right to drive.” It is a PRIVILEGE that is only obtained through passing tests and paying a TAX (lic. fee). It can be revoked at the governments’ will.

    4. While not available everywhere, in large cities, many walk to the subway or bus stop and take public transportation. They can live their whole life w/o ever driving a car.

      I knew several young men and women fm NYC, Baltimore, and other metro areas who joined the Navy or Marines w/o a driver’s license. Some were even in Truck Companies and had no idea how to operate a big rig until they were properly trained.

    1. From a private party – possibly. From any gun show – No. FFL vendors at gun shows have to run background checks just like a normal gun shop.

      Get your facts straight!

  14. I do agree with all of these. On the issue of gun’s one purpose being to kill, I guess nearly ALL of my guns (with the exception of my Win Model 70) are really defective. You see, they have never killed anything outside of the odd bowling pin at a competition – and that handgun had a really hard time doing that!

  15. Mr. Dolbee’s article “5 Top Gun Control Myths” is full of fallacies and half-truths.The greatest fallacy is that those who want to limit who can purchase “weapons of war” are out to take away your 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. “Assault” type rifles, such as the AR15 and the AK47 are weapons of war, designed as such and used as such, and have no place in the civilian world of sporting and target shooting arms. Mr. Dolbee seems to think that there is “an acceptable” number of annual deaths by rifle. The fact is, survivability of being shot by a handgun, shotgun or small caliber rifle is far greater than an assault-type weapon of war – which was designed for maximum damage to human flesh (the enemy). There is NO justification or reason for the general civilian public to own weapons of war!

    1. You, Sir, are a moron. A 5.56 is not deadlier than a .45 at the range we are discussing. And a AR-15 is no more dangerous than any other semi auto hunting rifle. I would rather get shot by it than my 1950’s era Browning BAR in .270.

    2. You’re SO uninformed it’s ridiculous! The AR’s and AK’s that are available to the public are semi-automatic. The ones used on the battlefield are select fire – with the capability to fire fully automatic.

      What about the M14? (Civilian version is M1A). It has much more firepower, is also semi-automatic, and can have similar capacities as AR’s and AK’s, but you didn’t mention those. Could it be because since you haven’t heard their names mentioned on a tag-line on CNN yet?

      The VT shooter used a 9mm Glock and a .22lr pistol.

      The guns aren’t the issue, it’s the idiots, lunatics and criminals who get their hands on them. There’s zero recourse in banning guns, because then, only the people who shouldn’t own them will find a way to get them, and all us responsible owners will be the ones punished as a result.

      Nobody has stated the obvious yet: Locked doors and/or metal detectors would have prevented the Florida school massacre. But, I guess the government doesn’t have enough funds to equip all schools with such revolutionary and cutting edge technology. And while I don’t like the thought of my child having to walk through metal detectors to go to school, it’s a solution that’s much more feaseable and attainable than thinking that a ban on guns will solve anything.

    3. The standard .223/5.56 round is designed NOT to do max damage. Dum-dum rounds are banned fm use in war because they are designed to do max damage.

      I would much rather be shot by a .223/5/56 than a large caliber round which makes a much bigger hole.

      Furthermore, the 2nd Amendment is abt permitting civilians to keep and maintain weapons of war. When it was written, the musket was high tech and a weapon of war. Why did the Founders write that in? To keep the tendency of gov’t to be oppressive.

    4. “Why did the Founders write that in?”

      Because they had first hand proof that a dictator / king, could and would set the military against the people. They fully intended the people to be on as equal a footing as those that might be used to enslave them.

      By all accounts, those who wrote The Constitution and The Bill of Rights, were enlightened and highly intelligent individuals. Their foresight in laying out our founding documents, is more than proof of their genius.

  16. The person/gun argument is what I hear most often, and the one that infuriates me the most. The car analogy is the best response I can see. It seems like common sense. First, guns don’t autonomously choose targets, there must be a person (or maybe a skynet operated AI ) to fire the weapon. Just like cars. If there is a legit malfunction in a firearm that causes harm, then by all means go after the gun and manufacturer, just like cars. That’s the point these folks just refuse to admit. With these “mass” shootings, we don’t have a gun problem. We have a people problem. I think that is the real issue.Now, based in that premise, that it’s a people problem, you will never resolve it 100%. People, humans, are complicated, impulsive and often unpredictable. Moreover, there are lots of us. All with different experience, backgrounds, and response to those experiences. Lastly, to get into predictive action, now that is a spooky place to be. To preemptively and actively limit folks freedom and rights because they fit a profile of someone who may commit a crime in the future. That undermines the entire premise of our nation, and that is where these folks are headed, whether they know it or not. People in general are capable if great and noble things. They are also capable of horrible and vile things. To try and stop these bad things is noble and worthwhile in my opinion. However, it is that struggle that makes us human. To think that these bad things can be totally eliminated is both foolish and dangerous in itself.
    I digress.

    1. Spot on.

      To apply the same logic — cars kill, let’s take them off the roads entirely.

      To mitigate the problem of jihadis attacking with cars, bollards are installed to harden the target. We can do the same for schools and other soft targets. The tech to mitigate slaughter is already available, if we want to deploy it.

  17. This article is excellent. It puts the subject clearly in focus. I really like the comment about ice cream and shootings.

  18. In the State of Ohio, we as Sales Consultants; are required to ask for a drivers license and Proof of Insurance before we can sell you a car. I imagine other states have similar laws.

  19. The grabbers really aren’t concerned what we call the firearm or how it looks….their ultimate aim is to ban them all. First the “scary” ones then all the rest. And they’ll proceed piecemeal if necessary. They’ll even regulate &/or ban air rifles and catapults (slingshots).

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit exceeded. Please click the reload button and complete the captcha once again.

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.