An Open Letter on Gun Control
A essay to Senator Barrasso, Senator Enzi and Representative Lummis:
In about a week, on April 8th, 2013, Congress will re-convene and the US Senate will formally take up gun control legislation in what represents the latest outrage in a whole string of such since January of 2009 to shred the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Standing on the graves of dead children, the gun controllers have whipped up a media frenzy in order to pile on more will restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms. Restrictions that will do nothing to keep criminals with evil intent from acquiring the firearms they need to carry out their criminal endeavors. These restrictions will fall fully and exclusively upon the law abiding citizens who had nothing to do with the crimes committed at Sandy Hook or in Aurora, Colorado.
Never has there been any debate or attempt to reverse the fundamental cause of these mass murders; the ‘gun free’ zone. It was this very policy that made such mass murders a reality in the first place. Yet, from the flurry of all these gun control proposals, is not one iota of introspection, on the part of those in the gun control crowd, that, maybe, the whole concept of the ‘gun free’ zone needs to be thoroughly vetted and rejected.
Indeed, the gun free zone is a kill zone. A shooting fish in a barrel zone. And, statistics bear this out. Generally, the mass killer when confronted by an armed citizen or law enforcement officer has the decency to commit suicide. The problem is that law enforcement can’t be everywhere, so their presence is many minutes away; giving the mass murderer an eternity of minutes to carry out his murderous plan. Whereas, an armed citizen, especially in a state with shall-issue concealed carry permits is right on the spot. On average, a mass murder will kill about 16 people until the police arrive, that number drops to an average of two when that same mass murderer is confronted by an armed citizen.
Further, rather than coming up with more gun control, more ‘gun free’ zones, and, now, more money to hire security for schools, simply enlist the help of the average citizen. Permit teachers, so willing, to get the training for a concealed carry permit and to carry their concealed guns to school. Encourage more citizens to carry in general; state that allow concealed carry do indeed have lower crime rates. Rewrite laws to reduce the legal burdens on citizens who step up and use their concealed weapons to stop a crime in progress.
And, while we are on the subject of crime. The criminal act that is the greatest threat to my life is that of an armed government against an unarmed civilian populace. In the Twentieth Century alone, some 100 or more million people have been killed by their governments–Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, Castro and so on. All following the same pattern: registration, confiscation and slaughter. The cycle is very predictable of about 20 years.
Universal background checks will not work for the same reason most gun control does not work. Criminals, as the term would imply, work outside the law. Therefore, all that happens is that the privacy of the law abiding citizen is violated. And, violated permanently, since the paperwork associated with any such purchase is permanent. If you really want a meaningful compromise, why don’t you couple any universal background check with a permanent and complete destruction of all associated paperwork of such transactions after, say, one year–including the paperwork mandated by the 1968 gun control act. Why don’t you limit the background check to the person and not the gun being purchases with, again, the same mandated destruction of those records of the transaction.
Finally, we get to first principals. The Second Amendment is not about hunting or sport. Neither term is even mentioned in the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment is about securing the fundamental right to the means for self-defense; the means to defend life, liberty and property. It about the means to have the means, in the form of specific weapons, that will give the citizen a measure of parity against the armed aggressor; whether the aggressor is a common thug or a thug in the pay of a tyrant.
There is a reason that the rifle of choice is the AR15 modern sporting rifle fitted with a standard capacity magazine of 30 rounds. There is a reason that the pistol of choice is a Glock with a standard magazine capacity of 15 rounds. Those reasons are the same for countless police forces who equip their law enforcement officers with the same. And, with the exception of full automatic fire, our soldiers are equipped with the same as well. Therefore, for the same reasons, every law-abiding citizen–who by state and federal law are a member of the militia–needs access to the same.
Each and every one of these gun control laws now before you in the Senate and, in the near future, the House, needs to be categorically rejected. There are some 20,000 gun control laws on the books already. Gun law number 20,001 is not going to make the slightest difference. Because, like the 20,000 before, all of these laws only strip away the most fundamental of civil rights of self-defense by the law abiding citizen while criminals will continue to ply their trade undisturbed since they don’t obey these laws in the first place.
Eugene P. Podrazik