Monday, March 06, 2006
BLOOD IN THE STREETS
Assault weapons ban
by de Andréa
December 27, 2005
Diane! Where is all the blood? In the days prior to the renewal of the Federal assault weapons ban, Senator Diane Feinstein said “if the Congress does not renew the assault weapons ban there will be blood in the streets.” In fact, since the defeat of the Federal assault weapons ban the violent crime in the U.S. has gone down, and no blood in the streets. Moreover, according to the October 2005 FBI annual crime report, in the past 30 years while gun ownership has gone up in the U.S. at the rate of 4 million guns a month across the nation, violent crime has gone down an average of 38 percent.
What is an assault weapon anyway? It must be a weapon that is used to commit an assault. But then, couldn’t one assault someone with a rock? If so, a rock must be an assault weapon. On the other hand, couldn’t one assault someone with almost anything? If that were true then the assault weapons ban really banned almost anything. If that were true, I am sure glad that the assault weapons ban was defeated. I know this is silly, but it shows how silly the assault weapons ban really was.
However If one would restrict the word weapons, to guns and nothing else, one would think that it would make some kind of sense, but it becomes just as silly. What kind of a gun is an assault gun? Can’t one assault someone with any kind of a gun? Or, can only certain kinds of guns be used to commit an assault? This is very confusing. The gun that Diane carries in her purse must not be of the assault type, because I am sure Diane would not want to ban her own gun, just everybody else’s gun.
What if one were to narrow the field only to military guns? Nope, just as confusing. In the military, every type of gun has been used at one time or another, well maybe not a paint ball gun, or a water gun. However, my circa 1903 Springfield hunting rifle is a modified WW I Infantrymen’s rifle. Is that an assault weapon? It was; at least in the year 1903 it was. It is interesting though, that it has never been specifically identified as an assault weapon. Then again, nothing has been specifically identified as an assault weapon.
One can easily see how confusing this assault weapon business can be. What a dilemma!
The Bottom Line: can only be, to turn to the Constitution where all the rules of a Free State are located. Now why didn’t we think of that before? Because then it would not have been as much fun. The Second Amendment reads as follows. “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.” Well that clears it up for me. Assault weapons, or not, the Constitution says it is our right, to keep it and bear it. Now if only Diane Could read, I do believe she would stop wasting so much valuable time and money, and create a lot less confusion in the Congress. Maybe we should give her a job looking for the BLOOD IN THE STREETS. Now that should keep her busy for a long while.
Posted by de Andrea at 6:57 PM