With the "War on Guns" now escalating in this country, surely everyone has heard of the AR-15, the so-called military "Assault Rifle" that "should be banned".
If that is how you think of the AR... If that is even in your vocabulary, then you are incorrect and grossly misinformed.
LIE: The "AR" is an assault rifle
The "AR" in AR-15 does not stand for assault rifle. It stands for Armalite rifle. Like any other industry, manufacturers like to name-tag their new products, so it should come as no suprise that when Armalite Incorporated first developed the AR platform in 1958, they put their name on it. "Armalite Rifle model 15" or AR-15.
The AR-15 is neither a military rifle, nor an Assault rifle. The AR-15 is a civilian model or semi-automatic rifle that is designed to be modular - that is, it can more easily be maintained and accessorized by the owner. This simply makes it easier to mount something like a scope or flashlight on the rifle for hunting or self defense.
A military Assault Rifle, so named because the armed forces takes is into battle, is a select fire weapon. Select fire means that by use if a selector switch, the weapon can by made to fire fully automatic. (as opposed to a "machine gun" with is always full auto). The AR-15 is not select fire, nor fully automatic. It is semi-automatic, like almost every other modern firearm in the world. Semi-automatic means that when you pull the trigger to fire a round, just one bullet is fired, and the gun reloads the chamber, ready to fire again.
LIE: "Civilians don't need an AR"
Gun-grabbing liberal politicians who will lie and tell you that civilians done need a semi-automatic AR or 30 round magazines. The AR platform is the most popular sporting rifle in America - more than all other rifles combined, and is used for hunting, self defense, plinking and general sport shooting. There is a reason for that!
http://whyguncontrol.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-need-for-semiautomatic-assault.html
When you go online or to the store buy a computer or TV, you don't buy a 20 year old model do you? You buy a new model, one with the latest in technology and conveniences, and then you customize it with software and wallpaper to meet your needs and style.
For rifles, that is the AR-15. It is a popular platform for that very reason. They can be chambered in a variety of calibers to suit your sporting or hunting needs, and can be modified to suit the specific purpose that you are guying the rifle for.
And yes, Civilians do have legal uses for AR-15s. They are commonly used for hunting, self defense, plinking and general sport shooting. The government wants to show a posting purpose? There are hundreds of examples of AR-15s used in sporting. However, the requirement for a sporting purpose is unconstitutional. (We'll discuss that in a later article)
If the government had it's way, civilians would be relegated to using nothing but old muzzle-loading black powder muskets like the pilgrims... or maybe not even that.
LIE: "Thse AR-15s should be banned, America would be much safer"
Actually, we tried that one already. In 1984, congress enacted a gun ban - legislation which specifically banned assault rifles. For over ten years, it was illegal to sell firearms with many of the common modern modular conveniences that makes the AR-15 so popular. Ten long years. We gave it the good ol' college try... not some flash in the pan legislation that was quickly overturned. And yet, statistics show that this ban (on one specific type of gun) made absolutely no impact on decreasing violent gun crime.
Why? Because with only a very very few scarce exceptions, AR-15s and other semiautomatic rifles are not used in violent crimes. Most gun crime is committed with a handgun.
LIE: "We should ban these high capacity clips that hold over 10 bullets"
First and foremost, it is not called a clip. The mechanism that hold the ammunition for a firearm is called a magazine.
Secondly, so called "high Capacity" magazines are those magazines which extend below the pistol grip, giving the handgun more ammunition than was originally intended by the manufacturer.
Thirdly,10 rounds is not "high capacity" for many handguns. The Glock, arguably the most common handgun in America, and widely adopted by police forces, security guards, and civilians alike, can hold as many as 17 rounds in a standard magazine depending on the model.
There are several reasons for legitimately needing more than 10 rounds in your handgun or rifle magazine.
First, there's accuracy. It's a one in million shooter that can hit their target every time. Unlike in the movies and old westerns, people can't pull off those amazing long distance or high accuracy shots. In real life, shooters miss. Even police, who practice regularly, statistically miss their target over 70% of the time in combat situations.http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/nyregion/08nypd.html
NYC police hit ratio
1999 13% accurate
2006 27% accurate
2008 29% accurate
Then there is the Lets take just the self defense situation: Typically, one bullet it not enough to stop an attacker unless you are an shoot for the brain or heart. In fact, many times, even two or three hits is not enough to stop an attacker. That is why the rule of thumb is "pop pop, did you stop? pop pop, did you stop?". Because most of the time, single shots do not cause enough hydrostatic pressure to traumatize the attackers body into an immediate "stop" of their actions. It can often take 5 rounds to stop a badguy from advancing.
So lets say there are 3 badguys in your house... To stop them, that's 15 rounds of ammo on target - not including missed shots. (God forbid that you attacker is on PCP or some other chemical substance - it could take 20 or more rounds to stop that one individual from attacking.)
Now, if you are suggesting that "why not shoot for the head or heart"? Then you have already forgotten about the combat accuracy issue. It is hard enough to hit your attacker, much less make it smaller by aiming for a 3"x3" part of it.
Not to mention that you simply don't understand the law. Shooting intentionally for the head or heart would be attempted murder. Unlike criminals who would just as soon put you in your grave, in self defense, we do no shoot to kill. We shoot to live. We shoot to stop the attacker. Unfortunately, that often ends in the criminals death. A defender only legally shoots for the heat or heart as a last result.
So YES, civilians do need magazines with capacity greater than 10 shotsfor self defense.
What about those "extended magazines", shouldn't we ban them to prevent more voilent crime?
Again, the gun-grabbers stated intentions (to reduce crime) wont be serverd by denying teh rest of the law-abiding public the use of extended magazines. Why? Because with only a very very few scarce exceptions, extended high-capacity magazines are not used in violent crimes. This is because high capacity magazines are not as common as standard sizes, and they make the handgun bulky, and therefore more difficult to carry and conceal.
Most gun crime is actually committed with a "standard" sized magazine. And more often than not, one that holds 10 rounds or less. (Every time you read an article that references a revolver, tell yourself "that hold 6 shots"). (Every time you read an article that references a .45 GAP (Glock Automatic Pistol) caliber or a .380 "pocket gun" like the LCP, tell yourself "that holds less than 10 rounds)
Just my opinion, but a criminal, who probably stole the handgun in the first place to commit another crime, probably doesn't go shopping around for a new high capacity magazine for his stolen gun - especially when he may abandon that gun (which police ballistics now has on record) and steal another one for his next crime.
LIE: More guns means more crime. Fewer guns means safety.
Another lie that Gun-grabbing liberal politicians will tell you is that we'd all be safer if only the police had guns. Civilians don't need them for protection. This is a blatant and bold faced lie.
Statistics (the wholly objective numbers provided by independent 3rd party researchers, not the biased liberal numbers) will show you that Crime goes DOWN with more guns in the hands of good guys.
Statistical tabulation of time series data from census and other social and economic surveys of individual United States counties in different years, used in a multivariate model of crime rates, shows a reduction in violent crime associated with states' adoption of laws that allow the adult population to carry concealed weapons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott
"States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes. For each additional year that a concealed handgun law is in effect the murder rate declines by 3 percent, rape by 2 percent, and robberies by over 2 percent. Concealed handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. First, they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves." - John R Lott, brilliant American Economist and Statistician
But that only makes sense - Criminals prefer their victims unarmed. In fact, in a recent interview with criminals both currently incarcerated and reformed, they all agreed on the point "why rob that house (with an armed homeowner) when you can hit the one next door, where there are no guns?" www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/01/04/Ex-Burglars-Admit-Gun-Owner-Outing-Map-Helps-Criminals
Even if we enacted the toughest gun control on the planet, violent and deadly crime, including gun crime, would still occur. Even if we made guns magically disappear, violent and deadly crime, would still occur. It's time to stop blaming the gun. Any 5 year old can tell you that it's not the gun's fault, it's the bad guy. We teach our children to take responsibility for their actions, so why would we project the responsibility for violent crime on an inanimate object instead of where it belongs, on the criminal?
More gun laws are not the answer. We should instead be focusing on better enforcement of existing laws, better proactive treatment options for those with mental illness, and more effective penalties such as capital punishment and incarceration without parole for convicted criminals.
No comments:
Post a Comment