The any-person-any-gun-any-place brigade persists in attempting to divert the discussion from the core subject which is the legality of rapid fire rifles and high capacity magazines. They are either very unsure of their case for such weapons remaining legal or a bit short on rational perception.
Here are some examples of their tactics:
1. The Second Amendment says I can own any weapon. Two women on Piers Morgan said that entitled them to own a tank. In fact, the Second Amendment refers only to the arming of a 'well regulated militia'. A few guys wandering around the forest or a shopping mall looking for bad guys does not constitute a well regulated militia.
Text of the 2nd Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
2. People are murdered by killers with all manner of weapons, not just AR15s. Sure, but there is no suggestion that there is a proposal to ban all guns, knives and the like. That could be debated too because handguns tucked out of sight are responsible for many deaths. However, the focus, despite attempts to blur it, is on guns used to kill many people very quickly.
3. Next they will take away all our liberties and kill us. Poppycock not worthy of a juveniles thinking.
4. Spurious and irrelevant data about killings in other countries. That has nothing to do with the epidemic of massacres in the US. How can any rational person ignore those tragedies and argue for no change in the law?
5. If there had been a man with a gun on those planes on 9/11, he could have stopped what happened. Maybe and maybe not. But we are talking about AR15s and the like. No Air Marshall would carry such a weapon. It would be a handgun and there is no suggestion that they be banned.
6. People kill, not guns. Well, people with guns kill. The focus, again for those who have missed the point, is on rapid fire rifles and high capacity magazines.
7. Spouting detailed knowledge as if that gives greater say in the discussion. It's plain for all to see that too many people in the US are being killed by weapons that have no legitimate purpose in civilian hands. It's not rocket science.
8 We will be attacked by either the Chinese, Al Qaeda or our own government, therefore I must have rapid fire weapons and high capacity magazines. Well, chaps, if any of those groups wanted to attack you, they would not walk around with guns. They would blast you from the sky one way or another. Your weapons would be useless against them. Your enemy is within. It's the proliferation of mass killing guns.
9. NRA logic. As far as I can see, the purpose of the NRA is to lobby on behalf of gun manufacturers and dealers, not the personal freedom that they pretend to defend.
Someone wrote earlier that those who oppose change are becoming so laughable in their arguments that they are helping more reasonable people to prove their point. That is very true. Some statements are so extreme or illogical that I wonder whether the write is emotionally fit to own a gun.
It's simple. There's a problem because mass killings are unacceptable and becoming more frequent. The massacre of young children is especially abhorrent. The most dangerous weapon is the AR15 type with a high capacity magazine. No other hand held weapon can kill so many people so quickly. There is no good reason for anyone to own such weapons. Surely, there's no case for arguing that nothing needs to be done. I accept that there are other issues to be addressed and I see that some of them are.
