Attempting to disarm American citizens

Democrat-Socialist “progressives” drive their issues on the fuel of emotion. Anger, resentment, vengeance and hate most often show in their rhetoric and activities, rather than logic, reason and science.

Further, their immediate schemes hide the real agenda of Utopian Justice they can never define or make rational. Thus, they resort to divisive, evasive and deceptive tactics. An example is the return of their disarming “ban on assault weapons”—a diversion from the ultimate goal of government confiscation of all firearms following their models in Great Britain and Australia.

An article by Marshall Lewin in the March issue of the National Rifle Association’s America’s 1st Freedom magazine, discloses a U.S. House Democrat plan to ban the manufacture of AR-15 type rifles and similar guns. All the Democrat candidates for president and President Obama have also called for a federal ban on these sporting firearms. This is not new, but it’s more insidious.

In 1994 Bill Clinton engineered a so-called “ban” on these weapons that expired in 2004. Mr. Lewin shows that the “entire ‘assault weapon’ hysteria is based on lies.” First, the public had to be deceived.

Josh Sugerman, the founder of the anti-gun Violence Policy Center invented the term because of “The weapon’s menacing looks.” These guns function no differently than earlier models of sporting rifles and shotguns, they simply look like the guns carried by military and police forces. They are not:

__automatic “machine guns” that “spray bullets”—they only fire a bullet when the shooter pulls the trigger: one squeeze; one round. This is called semi-automatic, common in most modern firearms. Democrats deceitfully display these sporting models to look like machine-guns.

__more “deadly” than other guns; they typically use .223 caliber bullets. Some States ban this relatively small-caliber for big-game hunting because it isn’t powerful enough for a knock-down kill leaving the possibility of only wounding the animals.

So, these modern sporting rifles are no more threatening, they simply appear to be. If looks could kill: that’s what the gun-baners hope people ignorant about firearms will believe.

In fact, the 1994 law didn’t prohibit these guns. Manufacturers had to make some minor external modifications, but more of them were sold during the 10-year law period than were produced and sold in the preceding 10 years. Not only aren’t the rifles more dangerous or threatening than others of the type, they are rarely used in crimes.

Despite the fact that there are an estimated 8 to 9 million of these popular guns in America the FBI reports that less than 3 percent of murders are committed with rifles—of any kind. The 1994 Clinton-ban had no effect on crime. Even the New York Times had to admit the evidence showed a renewed law would have little effect on gun violence; “too small for reliable measurement.” By definition, restricting ownership by millions of law-abiding American citizens will not get guns out of the hands of criminals.

But the latest Democrat plan to “renew” restrictions on our rights of choice and gun ownership would actually prohibit the manufacture of many semi-automatic rifles and pistols. There is no need for another unnecessary gun-control law; it will not prevent crime or make anyone safer.

But that’s not the baners’ point. Obviously, the only purpose here is to create another stealthy move toward the ultimate goal of disarming American citizens. They plan it and we know it.

Last year Hillary Clinton talking about the 1996 Australian confiscation and destruction of guns said, “I think it would be worth considering doing it on (U. S.) national level if that could be arranged.” She wants to arrange it. Clinton’s aim is to carry on the assaults on American constitutional liberties well under way by the Obama regime.

One of the first things necessary for Socialists to gain government control of free people is to disarm them so they have no way of defending themselves against the fascist tyranny inevitably imposed by these totalitarians.


About R. E. Smith Jr.

Mr. Smith writes essays and commentary on politics, American history, environment, higher education and culture. He's been published in print media and at blog sites for about 25 years. Smith's formal education includes B.S. and M.S. degrees from the State University of New York and Syracuse University. He has earned a 21-credit hour Certificate in Professional Writing from the University of North Carolina-Wilmington. Training/work experience: NYS Ranger School; U. S. Army, Corp of Engineers; soil scientist and forester with USDA; Assoc. Professor at SUNY; real estate agent; small business owner.
This entry was posted in Socialist Planning and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s