I’m not an NRA member. Personally, I have some mixed feelings on guns, but strongly support the Second Amendment, as I support the entire Constitution. The rhetoric on “gun-related” deaths is mired in “political-speak.” If you analyze the data below it is very easy to see who should NOT BE ALLOWED TO BUY GUNS! But if you speak the “words” you will be labeled a “racist” or an “uncaring b*st*rd.”
First, more than 2/3rds of gun deaths are suicides. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that we should prohibit the sale of guns to depressed Americans.
If one wishes to reduce “homicides” rather than “suicides,” then the following data are helpful. The thin “light blue” line are essentially “police related deaths.” I don’t know anyone arguing that the police should be disarmed (although I’m certain they are out there). As a proportion of the population, African Americans are far more likely to commit murder while Caucasian Americans are far more likely to blow their brains out.
Have you heard any “gun control” advocates espousing the prohibition of gun sales to African Americas?
Finally, all murders are “not equivalent.” I don’t like the fact that there are many gang related deaths by homicide, but I won’t be going to the funeral. By contrast the single innocent bystander death during a drive-by shooting is unconscionable.
The same can be said for terrorist murders. Did you notice that the medical examiner did not even take the assailant’s body to the same building as the victims of the Orlando Massacre? We hate the assailant and we pity the victims of terrorism. Even the type of terrorist is important. While I hate all terrorists, I am particularly irate about radical Muslim terrorists.
The next things to consider are the following:
- no American can purchase an “automatic” weapon (a weapon that fires multiple rounds with a single trigger pull)
- all semi-automatic weapons work the same way – one must pull the trigger for each discharge of the weapon
- thus a semiautomatic hand gun, a semiautomatic hunting rifle, and a semiautomatic rifle that looks like a military rifle all work in exactly the same way
- an American cannot actually buy a military grade weapon – also, military weapons are far too expensive for the vast majority of Americans
- Americans are allowed to purchase rifles that look like the military equivalent, while still being “one discharge per trigger pull”
- large magazines are considered to be more dangerous than small magazines because the assailant doesn’t need to reload as often.
So let’s think about this information. First all semiautomatic weapons are the same. One trigger pull results in one discharge. The Orlando assailant was in the Pulse Club for more than three hours. Major Nidal Hassan, the army psychiatrist convicted of the Fort Hood massacre, did his dirty work in 7 minutes. He used a semiautomatic handgun. (And let us not forget that Hassan was attacking trained military on a military base.) He managed to fire 100 rounds between the start of his rampage at 1:20 p.m. and the time he was shot at 1:27 p.m. How many rounds can a handgun shoot in seven minutes? At least 1,500. Modern semiautomatic weapons can discharge a round and load the next bullet into the chamber faster than even the nimblest of fingers can pull the trigger. FBI studies have shown that a novice can fire three shots in less than a second, and a trained shooter can double that. That means an experienced gunman can fire off a 20-round magazine in 3.3 seconds. Reloading takes under two seconds.
Therefore, the current argument about large capacity clips is not relevant. Similarly, the argument about “handguns” versus “assault weapons” is moot.
Thus, what the Democrat Party is suggesting is that “scary looking rifles” be banned. This would have zero effect on terrorism related murders or murders overall in the United States.
If the Democrat Party (and their fearless leaders, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton) were serious about reducing “gun-related” deaths they would need to pass legislation that forbade the sale of guns to Americans who were depressed or might become depressed, African Americans under the age of 30-years, and Muslims. If they wanted to add the “terror watch list” to that legislation I would not object, provided they could clean up the list to only contain actual terror suspects rather than law abiding American citizens.
I wonder what the Supreme Court would think of that legislation?