By Kurt Hofmann
The only reason to have 33 bullets loaded in a handgun is to kill a lot of people very quickly.
So says Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), in pushing his bill to send people to prison for 10 years for having an 11-round magazine (except for “Only Ones,” or even retired “Only Ones”).
The plain truth is that semiautomatic assault weapons look bad because they are bad. They were designed and developed to meet a specific military goal, which was killing and wounding as many people as possible at relatively short range as quickly as possible, without the need for carefully aimed fire.
That’s from the Violence Policy Center (VPC), and their explanation as to why so-called “assault weapons” need to be banned.
“[T]here’s only one reason for owning a gun like that – killing people. There’s no other use other than to kill people. That’s all they’re made for.
That was the Brady Campaign (pdf file), quoting an anti-armed-citizenry sheriff.
Buffalo Police Commissioner Daniel Derenda states,”In my opinion, [AK-47 rifles and other high-powered semiautomatic assault weapons] exist for one purpose and one purpose only and that is to kill.”
That’s one of many quotes compiled by the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV), on their own “ban ‘assault weapons'” page.
Those are just a few examples of a common theme among those who object to private citizens possessing the means to protect their families, their liberty, their homes and their lives, and they’re all variations of the more fundamental idea that “a gun’s only purpose is to kill.”
Those who find these arguments convincing should be very concerned, then, about the fact that there are now more privately owned guns in the U.S. than ever before, with handguns (particularly those that use “high capacity magazines”) and so-called “assault weapons” (fthe very guns most often denigrated as existing “only to kill”) leading the way.
People must be getting gunned down left and right then, right? Um . . . not so much:
Preliminary FBI figures reveal that the levels of both violent crime and property crime in the U.S. declined in 2010 from the previous year’s data.
The 2010 Preliminary Annual Uniform Crime Report, just released today, shows a 5.5 percent decrease in the number of reported violent crimes when compared with data from 2009. It also shows a 2.8 percent decline in reported property crimes.
The FBI report quoted above is titled “Crimes Rates Fall Again.” Yes–again–it is, in other words, a continuing trend, one that lasted right through the the dramatic surge in firearms sales in late 2008 and through 2009. All these guns just don’t seem to be doing “the only thing they’re good for.“
This is not to say, of course, that the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms can legitimately be forced to depend on some favorable statistical outcome. Such a condition would obviously be completely inconsistent with the entire concept of fundamental rights.
Still, it’s always fun to point out that the “gun control” lobby is, once again (still?) lying.
Oh–and if anyone wants to get rid of their guns, because the darned things haven’t “fulfilled their only purpose,” and killed anyone, look me up.
See also:
- Gun sales up; crime down
- Even MSNBC forced to admit numbers don’t support ‘gun control’
- Dog attacks bring out the backlash; Crime down, gun sales up!
Kurt Hofmann
St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner
Are guns becoming less capable? added by Vincent on
View all posts by Vincent →
You must be logged in to post a comment Login