This story us s little personal for me. I went
to Sacramento to lobby lawmakers to not to pass this law. I have
been, and continue to be against this law and all "assault weapons"
bans in the United States including the 1994 Federal assault weapons ban; The Public
Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act or Federal
Assault Weapons Ban. California Attorney General at the time; John Van De Kamp,
pushed through this legislation as a purely emotional reaction, one not based
on the rule of law, to the Stockton School Shooting incident in January 1989.
My opposition has three elements. First of all, long
rifles, that are legal, and used for hunting, and some that were and, and still
are used in war, are the same firearm. All Fire arms are assault weapons, because they are an
offensive. They are also a defensive weapon. That distinction being the user, The
distinction between the prohibited weapons, and law abiding weapons, is a
fallacy.
Second, the prohibition is a violation of the Second Amendment
to the United States Constitution. The amendment was put there as a safeguard
for the people against a tyrannical government, and each other. Weapons can be regulated
by law, but being outright banned is a violation of the Constitution.
Third, the pernicious and arbitrary, manner in which the law
made felons of otherwise law abiding citizens. When we as a society, lock up
citizens merely for owning a certain "type" of firearm in violation
of our own rule of law. Merely because those weapons kill, as other guns do. Then
we as citizens have abdicated our individualism and personal freedom to the
government, or tyrants. The personal freedom to be safe from violent criminals,
and safe from the government.
Make no mistake, the gun was invented for one reason; to kill.
Whether it be for food, or for protection. Like Schroderings Cat, the gun can
be an offensive, or a defensive weapon. Only after it is picked up does it
become a definitive "type" of weapon.
United States District Court Judge Roger Benitez in California,
ruled that the California assault weapons ban, went against the Second
Amendment. He found the way California defines military style rifles, deprives
the citizens of California weapons that are allowed elsewhere in the U.S.
California argued against the ruling: "because the weapons
can still be used - just not with the modifications that turn them into assault
weapons. Modifications like a shorter barrel or collapsible stock make them
more concealable, state officials said, while things like a pistol grip or
thumbhole grip make them more lethal by improving their accuracy as they are
fired rapidly."
The state, or anyone else, arguing that one style of firearm is
more lethal than another, simply because of certain attachments or accessories,
is shortsighted, ignorant, and disingenuous. That argument is not rooted in
common sense. It is rooted in hyperbole, emotion and fear. This argument holds
no more water than the Titanic, and like the fabled ship, this law is sinking,
and it is long overdue. This stupidity has gone on long enough. Remember; common
sense will free us from common ignorance. We just have to exercise more of the
former, and less of the latter. Good day to all, God Bless you all, and God
Bless the United States of America.
Comments
Post a Comment