by Rich Grassi
This gun only holds five rounds, less than 10, meaning this gun isn't evil. Right? No, it's evil because it's small and concealable. It also has an aiming laser making it a WMD -- haven't you seen the latest Hollyweird epic, like Loaded Gun?
It seems that fair should be fair even in regulation and laws. It's not to be, though as the deck is always stacked. One side or another has the upper hand in all these things. This is why "fair play" is not mentioned as a component of public policy. It doesn't count.
For example, if only the most evil amongst us avail ourselves of protection handguns with capacities of greater than 10 rounds that means that only the good amongst us use the shorter-capacity single-stack autos or revolvers. If only the good amongst us carry lighter capacity guns such as LCRs, Centennials, Tomcats, LC9s, Solos, etc, we should be able to carry them everywhere
, all the time."Gunbuster" signs no longer need apply.
It affords the law abiding a measure of protection while keeping high capacity business in the purview of felon and cop. Never mind that a case on record shows a violent criminal actor required a responding officer to use all the rounds in his M4 - and the record shows he was disciplined and used restraint - and he still had to use the top four rounds in his 15-round .40 caliber pistol to stop a threat.
Does this mean we agree that cops, let alone military service members, are evil? Or that magazines make us evil? No. Magazine capacity no more makes us evil than a Harvard degree confers upon the holder common sense. It more appropriately means the other side must have their folly -- a straw man. They have to denigrate those who insist on exercising their gun rights. It's important to try to get the "undecided" or the "marginally engaged." for that, they scream, "NO one needs that many bullets!" (sic) To accomplish this, they drag out the "us" vs. "them," the hunters versus the shooters. Those who would deny our gun rights seem to have a fetish for magazine bans. It was not always so; before magazines, it was "sniper rifles." Before that it was "cheap, easily concealed handguns known (to them) as Saturday Night Specials." Know where they got that term? It's racist in origin. Use your favorite search engine to find out the origin of the term.
Do you live in a place where governments destroy guns they seize? That's a particular subset of hoplophobia symptoms based upon an apparent theory we can punish the tool for the crime committed by the fool who used the tool. "By God, that'll show them!" I can almost hear them chortle. "The next Colt Python won't dare
be involved in crime seeing what happened to the last!"
Ignoring the fact that "blaming the tool" is a sign of mental illness, we can propose that - to be fair - the get-away car of the felon, the car or light truck used by an intoxicated operator, or a car owned and licensed by someone who's privilege to drive is revoked, must be seized. After the legal proceedings involving the suspect's ride are concluded, the car must be destroyed. I mean cut it, every piece, every component all the way to the last lug bolt. Cars used in crimes could be co-opted by government for use in operations in the short term. At the end of that term, it goes to the crusher, the chop saw and the melting pot.
It can be a '64 Fairlane, a late model Kia or a six-figure Ferrari. Whatever the ride, use it and lose it. Period. No appeals on forfeitures. If you're convicted and you were caught in a car (light truck or on a motorcycle), it goes on the path to destruction.
Now that's fair.
They wanted the NRA to meet with the occupant of the White House to see where they have common ground on gun controls. Apparently there is no common ground, a good thing. I'm sure there are hunters who wish Mr. LaPierre would attend the meeting. We could give up those icky black rifles, there's no pride of ownership in those things.
Well, the lion's share of firearms practitioners are no longer (exclusively) hunters. Hunters have been outnumbered by fans of the modern sporting rifle - and by concealed carry licensees! Put those "shooters" together and they are the New Majority.
Now, if you're a hunter, who do you feel more comfortable with? Those who share your firearms heritage, your love of the outdoors and, in some cases, share your sport? Or are you more comfortable with those who seek to "divide and conquer?"
They're treating you like chumps; making you think they won't come after your guns next. They will. They always have.
With us, you always have a home and someone who appreciates you and your sport. It won't be a permit-holder or modern sporting rifle type who's ready to "trade in" your gun rights.
It'll be the anti-gun fascist.