Khalil Spencer makes a lot of good points in his/her letter. Unfortunately, until the Left, Liberal, Anti-Gun crowd is willing to listen and quit generating lies and deceit to advance their agenda nothing will ever get accomplished when it comes to guns and how they relate to the violence in this country.
They won’t accept concrete facts and make forceful and bitter verbal attacks against those that don’t agree with them and many resort to MOB violence! These are the type of individuals that expect us to cave into their demands and that’s not going to happen as long as they continue this behavior.
As for Ms. van Dyck’s letter: The argument that the Second Amendment was written when our forefathers only had single shot muzzleloaders and that it doesn’t apply to the weapons we have today, is getting really old. Did our forefathers also not foresee the invention of the Internet, Facebook, Twitter and Social Media in general, that is used to bully, intimidate, and demean others? Social and the Main Stream Media have become weapons of mass manipulation. Yet we still strongly support the First Amendment! Liberals love their freedom of speech and know their First Amendment rights more than they know manners. But free speech rights go out the window when their opposition expresses their opinions. Their ideas of peaceful protesting include property destruction, attacks on those with opposing beliefs, and outright hatred. So, if you are not willing to support ALL the amendments equally you’re a hypocrite!
Law abiding gun owners have been actively working on programs to curb the violence we see in our schools. From arming teachers and/or security personnel in schools, as well as having Metal Detectors school entrances and providing clear backpacks.
We’ve prompted Law Makers to allow people with concealed carry licenses to bring guns onto college campuses as well as allow people to carry guns onto church grounds.
We also have the “Eddie the Eagle” program that teaches kids gun safety and is a gun accident prevention program that seeks to help parents, law enforcement, community groups and educators navigate a topic paramount to our children’s safety.
We have also pressured Judges and Attorney Generals to keep violent offenders in jail. No more “Plea Agreements” or the ability to “Post Bail”.
This is way more than any of the Anti-Gun Groups can claim credit for. All they do is scream, yell, and march in the streets and accomplishes nothing.
Yes, every generation has had their share of bratty spoiled kids, but they never had the entitled attitude that today’s kids have. Today’s kids expect everything to be handed to them without them having to work for it. They would rather join violent protests on subjects they know nothing about rather than go to school or get a job. They believe rules don’t apply to them. The sad thing is the parents won’t hold their kids accountable and not only support their actions but encourage them as well. Unfortunately, now we live in a time where the sole concern of everyone is themselves.
Also, few terms have been more politically productive for the anti-gun lobby than “assault rifle.” The title, ironically enough, may have been coined in World War II by the Germans, but that hasn’t stopped the anti-gunners from using the designation to strike fear and trepidation into the hearts of the uninformed.
The first half of this new definition fits the historic understanding of the term and aligns with Merriam-Webster’s previous entry. The old definition isn’t great, either, but at least it doesn’t affirm the anti-gun contention that an “assault rifle” can be used to describe appearance rather than function.
In their bid to ban as many firearms as possible, gun control proponents have tried to convince the public that “assault rifles” are just a set of cosmetic features that make a firearm “resemble” a military assault rifle. It doesn’t matter to them that these cosmetic features—folding stocks, pistol grips, bayonet lugs, etc.—don’t measurably affect function.
The problem with the anti-gun agenda is that automatic weapons—those that truly can be called assault rifles—are already heavily regulated and virtually never used in the perpetration of a crime.
That leaves you and the rest of the Anti-Gun Crowd with only one option: attack appearance rather than function. Which is what the new Merriam-Webster definition aims to do. If a rifle looks like an assault weapon, then it must be an “assault weapon,” and if the dictionary says so, “it must be true”.
More laws won’t solve anything. California, Chicago, New Jersey, all have extremely strict gun laws yet violent crime involving guns has skyrocketed in these cities and states. A felon in California was found to have over 500 guns in his possession where he was charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm, and illegally having an assault rifle and large-capacity magazines. Yet he was released on bond one day after his arrest. What’s the point of having laws if they are not enforced and now you expect more laws to solve the problem?
If we truly want to stop mass shootings of innocent people we must look at the people, not the method or tool they use. People want to know how to protect themselves and protect their families, yet the anti-gun crowd wants that ability taken away.
Liberals preach “tolerance,” but seem incapable of actually tolerating any viewpoint that doesn’t perfectly mirror their own.