For Americans tired of NRA bullying.

[RetiredArmy]

But you won't tell me what guns you would approve of either.

Knock it off, You want to drag me into a shell game to avoid facing our gun death problem.

Assault riffles and big clips for either riffles or handguns. Not that fucking complicated.

Some might question your use of the word "clip," but your reference is obvious.  It is, in todays' vocabulary, synonymous with "magazine."  I promise not to drag you into any shell games, but I would like to pose a few questions. 


What defines an assault rifle?  Is it the pistol grip, the bayonet lug, or the Weaver rails?

Do these features make the firearm more deadly than other firearms, say, without a bayonet lug or pistol grip? 


I understand the fear of mass killings.  I share the fear of mass killings.  Mass killing can be accomplished by a multitude of means.  Running a car through a crowd of people at a parade and blowing people up with a pressure cooker are mass killings.  Should we go after the assault cars and assault pressure cookers? What criteria should we look for on cars and pressure cookers to label them "assault" weapons, versus other cars and pressure cookers?  Insane people can accomplish a mass killing by many means.  A fancy rifle with a pistol grip is not required. 

Let's consider the true importance of an armed populace.  There are two unlikely circumstances which have occurred with certain repetition in human history, tyranny within ones' own country and invasion from the outside.  Do you think neither of these could happen? Ever?  An armed populace prevents these.  I'm not saying we have the threat of tyranny right now. It's clear we don't.  If we are paying attention, however, it's also clear our world is not the utopia required for the removal of the capability of armed resistance. 

Let's also consider a black market.  Any restriction of certain items by the government creates a black market.  A black market is better for criminals and terrorists.  If I were a terrorist, I would love for the American public to NOT have firearms.  The less capable the firearms are in public, the better for those wishing to do harm.

If we only had more sheepdogs...  I invite you to look up "On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs" by LTC (RET) Dave Grossman and give it a read.  It's short and to the point and it's the first result on google if you search for that title.  In my opinion, we don't have enough sheepdogs.  Police cannot be everywhere at all times, so we need those that have the capacity to defend others to DO SO!  You can't properly do that if you aren't armed, not against terrorism and insanity.  You might say I don't need a fancy rifle with a pistol grip to do that.  Are you asking the sheepdog to go up against a terrorist who is wielding a full-auto AK-47 (very illegal, BTW, without an federal license, and the terrorist can get one despite law)?  And you want said sheepdog to have only a pistol, a knife, or a rock?  I mean, I would, I'd do it, but I'd rather have as good or better armament than my opponent.  Why are you trying to limit us?

There is a high amount of responsibility required for the use of firearms.  It's a PERSONAL responsibility, and harm to others as a result of a failure of personal responsibility needs to be met with severe consequences.  I look forward to receiving replies.