Jump to content
Why millions of Americans — including me — own the AR-15
I was marginally surprised to have been linked to the article via the Yahoo homepage.
Regarding Dan's point about keeping our eye on the ball, it appears that the White House's initial strategy was to keep Americans from hearing the terrorists state their objectives & motivations:
“I pledge of allegiance to [redacted]. I pledge allegiance to [redacted] may God protect him [in Arabic], on behalf of [redacted].”
Even though everyone knew the score. Arrogance and stupidity writ large - the sheeple will believe whatever they're told to believe, and ignore what we censor out of the official record.
Someone must have convinced Preezy that his head-in-the-sand routine wasn't playing well, because the full transcript has been released. A clue-by-four moment for the administration? Color me skeptical.
Defensive gun deployments number upwards of 2.5 million annually. A few examples:
Pearl, Miss: scumbag shoots 7 people at a high school. Principal runs to his car for his .45, halts the attack & detains the shooter for the cops.
Salt Lake City: scumbag stabs two people at a grocery store. A patron with a CCW permit pulls his pistol, stops the attack and detains the assailant for the cops.
Grundy, VA: disgruntled student guns down three people at a law school. A couple of other students run to their cars for their pistols, stop the attack & hold him for the cops.
Las Vegas, NV: two armed robbers attempt to take off an internet cafe. An elderly CCW carrier pulls his pistol and opens fire. The robbers flee (and are later arrested, after turning up at the hospital with gunshot wounds).
It's worth noting that in the instances of the school shootings cited, both campuses were gun free zones, obliging the good guys to keep their guns off site. Wouldn't you prefer that those weapons had been close at hand? If not, why?
Good point, Dan. The Pilot recently banned a commenter here for labeling another member as a "Jew hater." It would be interesting to see the Pilot delineate which kinds of personal attacks and insult are permitted, and why. But I'm not holding my breath.
I'll refrain from a fabricated hypothetical and cite something that actually happened. In 2007 the New Life Church in Colorado Springs was attacked by a 20-something lunatic. He was armed with a rifle, 2 handguns, a grenade, and 1000 rounds of ammo. It was a Sunday, and day 3 of some sort of revival meeting with upwards of 10,000 members in attendance.
The lunatic killed 2 and wounded 2 more before church member Jeanne Assam was able to acquire the target and return fire. Her first 5 shots knocked him down. Her last 2 finished him off before he was able to pull the pin on the grenade he was reaching for.
To Ken Collins: would you prefer that Ms. Assam had not taken her Beretta to church that day? If so, why?
Over the weekend, one of the official strategies to combat Islamic terror was keep Americans from hearing the terrorists state their objectives & motivations:
“I pledge of allegiance to [redacted]. “I pledge allegiance to [redacted] may God protect him [in Arabic], on behalf of [redacted].”
Even though everyone knew the score. Arrogance and stupidity writ large - the sheeple will believe whatever they're told to believe.
Someone must have convinced Preezy that his head-in-the-sand routine wasn't playing well, because the full transcripts have been released. A clue-by-four moment for the administration? Color me skeptical.
Incidentally, I miss Jimmy Swaggart. His fire & brimstone routine was one of the most entertaining Vaudevilles ever; that he and Jerry Lee Lewis grew up in the same family makes a boatload of sense.
As a general principle, this heathen distances himself from all Abrahamic faiths on the grounds that all of them – without exception – privilege faith over reason. But not all of them are equally malignant in the same way all the time. If I was ranting in the 1930's, I would propose the Roman Catholic Church as the most dangerous religion in the world, owing to its open allegiance to fascism and antisemitism. From which I don't believe the West has ever completely recovered, nor ever will.
In the here and now, the most toxic incarnation of Abrahamic religion is Islam. The very notion that the end game is Sharia Law – A FREAKING THEOCRACY – and the best way to get there is Jihad; and that Muslims have a singular prerogative to A) feel aggrieved enough to demand it, and B) slaughter those who disagree, is infanitely more obscene, hateful, destructive, and evil than Fred Phelps/Jerry Fallwell/Jim & Tammy Faye/Jimmy Swaggart squared.
There is no Christian analogue to Sharia law of the sort imposed by the House of Saud (whom Preezy & Hillary assure us is “moderate”). Nor a Western parallel to UN Resolution 62-154, which calls upon every nation to criminalize any and all criticism of Islam. Its signatories include all 56 members of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference. Not just a handful of lunatics in a cave, not just Iran or Sudan, but every Muslim nation on earth; including those whom our elites assure us are "moderate."
Those same elites and their minions condemn observations like these as bigotry. In moderate Saudi Arabia, distributing Bibles will land you in one of their moderate prisons. Questioning the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (Propeller Beanie Upon Him) will earn you a public beheading in Riyadh. But I'm the bigot. That's good to know.
I missed the "automatic" part of Martha's proposition the first time around. For all intents and purposes, there is no fully automatic small arm (machine gun) that Americans can legally possess. Restrictions of fully automatic weapons began when the National Firearms Act was passed in 1934. It imposed a very stiff tax, set up a labyrinth of legal hoops to jump through, and required the weapon to be registered. That registry was closed during the Reagan administration.
My AR could be easily converted to full auto if I wasn't law abiding. But why on earth would I want to? Ammo is expensive. And a fully-automatic rifle is significantly (and dangerously) less accurate.
You write: "I'm still at a loss as to how owning either an automatic or semi-automatic rifle is justifiable. Hunting, shooting sports and self-defense do not require such weapons."
As far as hunting is concerned, it's a debatable point. Competitive shooting, no so much. Unless you believe those kinds of contests should be restricted to single action revolvers & bolt action rifles. Then we can limit Daytona entrants to using the 1.8 liter hamster wheels like I have in my Suzuki. Because there is no justifiable need for all that horsepower.
Regarding self defense, we start with the following premise: every human being has an inherent, inviolable right to self defense. That means you'll want to be at least as well equipped as the bad guys. A “one shot stop” - especially with a pistol – is exceedingly rare.
The Tsarnaev boys, if you'll recall, waged a pitched gun battle against the police & exchanged hundreds of rounds. The younger of the two (the oh-so dreamy one who made the cover of Rolling Stone) manged to escape that encounter despite being hit more than a dozen times – including with a head shot.
If the world is dangerous enough to furnish SSPD and RCSO with 9-millimeters and AR-15s, law abiding citizens have every right to be identically equipped if we choose. Especially since we're the ones obliged to confront those dangers long before the police arrive.
Here's a former Navy SEAL making the case that you and I should acquire an AR-15 (I already have one. Perhaps another?)
Last login: Wednesday, June 8, 2016
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.
Tablet version |