Guns:

Originally posted on FB 2/14/13

Some of us want to have a common sense discussion regarding U.S. firearm policies. Sadly, some of us don't.

There are various legislative proposals regarding gun regulations, restrictions, and bans (of specific ammunitions and assault weapons). However, despite what we hear on talk radio or read on many FB memes, there is no proposed legislation overturning the Second Amendment. No one has even proposed a ban of all semi-automatic weapons (let alone all guns). There are no federal legislative proposals being considered that would take away a person's right to own a gun, to protect their home, to hunt, and/or shoot skeet.

We as a nation should be able to have an honest debate....but many of the folks who oppose gun-control simply refuse.

As a nation, we need to talk about universal background checks, high capacity ammo, semi-automatic weapons, registration, training, ballistic fingerprinting, mental health, public school security, etc. etc.
And we should not expect that one side of the political divide will succeed in all of their goals.

But let's be clear...
You do NOT have a constitutional "right" to own/use/buy/sell a semi-automatic assault weapon.
You do NOT have a constitutional "right" to own/use/buy/sell high capacity ammo.
You do NOT have a constitutional "right" to own/use/buy/sell weapons and/or ammo free of any/all government regulation.
Period.

This was put to rest 75 years ago....since 1938 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in United States vs. Miller...when the National Firearms Act was upheld. The court held that the NFA provision (criminalizing possession of certain firearms) was not violative of the Second Amendment's restriction and therefore was not unconstitutional.
Also, in more recent times, the was of course the Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 (expired in 2004).

So, now that that's been settled, if you disagree with specific gun-control proposals, then by all means, make your case....but don't hide behind a false premise/narrative that the current proposals are unconstitutional and infringing on your "rights."
I do understand why some folks do that (and will continue)....it's difficult to explain to the public why anyone needs an AK-47 (because no one does)....or why anyone needs to be able to fire 30 rounds of bullets without reloading (again, no one needs to be able to do that)....
You see, at the end of the day, if anti-gun control folks are forced to be honest, they then have to admit the truth....they simply "want" those types of guns and ammo....but such an acknowledgement then gets them into an even more difficult conversation with the public about why they want it (there's that whole 'black helicopters landing in our back yard' theory)....

The NRA (and their Ditto Heads) know they'll very likely lose this debate if we're able to have the public discourse honestly, reasonably, and without bogus distractions.
The fact that they simply want these weapons, not "need" or have a "right" but simply "want"....add to that their often crazy Branch-Davidian like views of our government....when the reality of their position is juxtaposed to the horrific realities of Newtown, Tucsan, Aurora, Virginia Tech, and so many others....when this debate is based in reality and fact....then the insanity of the status quo becomes undeniable.