With the chaos surrounding the assassination attempt I was reading though just about any article I could find to try and piece together as much information I could, and yes, that means I was reading the very liberal media as well. What really struck me was an article I was reading regarding the shooter, as I was reading this article there was a linked article between two paragraphs that was not relevant to the article "How the AR-15 Became America's Most Dangerous Weapon" An article written on Time in May of 2023, so I naturally had to read it.
Initially, they went through a brief history of the rifle, then came the juicy part where we start digging into the definitions of "Weapon of War" and an "Assault weapon". The widely accepted definition of assault weapon or rifle speaks to a rifle that is fully automatic, which as we know is incredibly restricted for civilians to own. Despite this definition states such as California have created their own definition, I have attached the CA senate bill defining this. Weapon of war speaks to a weapon that is provided to armed forces for combat. In an article from Gunpowder Magazine they discuss this definition and explain how the AR-15 differs from the military's M16 rifles, this is also noted in the Time article.
Okay, so now that we have the definitions out of the way... What's the point? As we know there is a large group of people targeting firearms, and the starting point tends to be the AR-15 and they are using the terms defined above to scare people who are uneducated and scaring them into believing it. Simply the term "Semi-automatic" has people thinking that AR-15s can fire multiple shots with a single trigger pull. Then we focus on the mass shootings say things like "10-17 of the most deadly mass shootings used Ar-15 style rifles". Reading through another article on NBC News, they included that 12 out of 21 of the most deadly mass shootings included this rifle. Further into the article they break down percentages of types of firearms used in mass shootings, number 1 at 88% being handguns and the least being AR-15 rifles at 12% since 2006. Commentary in this article from a gun advocate points out the fact that this is not about AR-15s its about all guns and the AR-15 is just the beginning.
The most recent grab at our rights comes just days after the attempted assassination of former president Trump... In which coincidentally an AR-15 rifle was used. Biden speaking at an NAACP conference Tuesday 7/16. Biden during this uses emotional grabs bringing in the death of children from gun shots to make his point that these weapons need to be banned. Whereas republican delegates at the RNC are not focusing on the weapon itself but the mental health of the individuals who are killing people with firearms. Reviewing this list of mass shootings occurring from 2012-2022 there is a common trend between the shooters in that they were reported to have a notable issue phytologically, where I would argue anyone willing and wanting to kill anyone has some sort of mental illness. In some cases these individuals obtained weapons and the "red flag laws" in place should have prevented the firearms from being purchased but in other cases weapons' were obtained through other legal methods to some arguably illegal methods.
While I can go on and on with data from numerous sources. The point is very simple, all of these attacks are aiming to take away the Second Amendment right. Whether you believe all, some or none of these attacks are staged the government is using them to convince scared individuals that civilians should not have firearms because we are a danger to society, when in reality there are way more law abiding citizens with guns than there are criminals and most people would never be the wiser to those carrying a firearm around them. I have had numerous conversations with people who believe only active military should have weapons, no police or citizens which completely defeats the purpose of the second amendment. The second amendment is in place so that we the people can defend ourselves against the government and was intended so that we could match the firepower of any federal army... And if you don't think that would ever be needed think again.
Comment below anything you think I missed or want to add!
1 comment
Well as I have said, the “gun grab” to me is misdirected by the government. It is used a lot to get us to look away from what they are really doing.
As for the AR15 itself. As mechanical engineer that works for the DoD I can say this for certain. The AR15 in civilian circulation would NEVER be allowed to be used by the military. Therefore, weapon of war does not apply. Even the best and most expensive AR15 manufactured would not pass the US DoD requirements. With that said, is there true weapons of war available to the civilians? Oh yes. Matter of fact it was designed for war and is very effective. But is widely overlooked by the law makers because it doesn’t have a scary pistol grip. The M1 Garand. No better effective weapon. Even a worn out used up one is very effective and in today’s opinion, not an issue because it has a wood but stock.
I see all this as “Bad Parenting”. Meaning, if little Johnny isn’t allowed to touch your 90 inch flat screen. Do you throw out (ban) the Flat screen so he doesn’t touch it or do you stop lil Johnny? It’s easier to throw out the flat screen (ban). No Flat screen, problem solved. He won’t touch it.
Good discussion.
Bigmonkey