Tuesday, October 03, 2017

Just Wanted You To know The Gun Did Not Kill 59 people

“Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.”- Cyril Connolly (1903 - 1974)

Just Wanted You To know The Gun Did Not Kill 59 people


By de Andréa

Opinion Editorialist for

Posted October 3, 2017   

First I want to offer my sad condolences to the families of the 59 dead and the more than 500 injured in Las Vegas Nevada, May God be with you all. 

By now you all know about the mass shooting in Las Vegas so I won’t spend a lot of time going over all the sad details.

Just to say that country music star Jason Aldean said of the event, “It’s beyond horrific.” And then adding “It hurts my heart that this would happen to anyone who was just coming out to enjoy what should have been a fun night.”
The singer was on stage, singing the last song of the night, when 64-year old Stephen Paddock began opening fire on defenseless concertgoers from his 32nd floor hotel room at the Mandalay Bay Hotel and Casino.  Paddock then took the cowards way out by taking his own life as police attempted to subdue him.
President Trump called the shooting an “act of pure evil,” before praising the heroic efforts of the first responders. He went on to say: “My warmest condolences and sympathies to the victims and families of the terrible Las Vegas shooting. God bless you!”

But even though this is said to be the worst mass shooting in modern American history, I want you to understand that the gun is not to blame. Nothing or no one is to blame except Stephen Paddock. 

Fox News is reporting that ISIS has taken responsibility for the attack claiming that Paddock was a recent convert to Islam, they also say that Paddock “was known” to local authorities.
Federal law enforcement sources told Fox News that Paddock “was known to local authorities” in Vegas, and multiple weapons were found in his hotel room. 
At this time, federal officials do not see any connection to international terrorism and little is known about Paddock’s motivation, sources said. The Islamic State terror group took credit for the Las Vegas shooting, saying the gunman converted to Islam months ago.

However, there is no evidence (yet) to support this assertion from ISIS.
And then sadly, as Rahm Emanuel once indicated:  “The Democrats refuse to let any crisis go to waste…”
Right on que, the far left has already begun calling for more gun control.
Example: Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton said: “The crowd fled at the sound of gunshots. Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get,” she tweeted, adding: “Our grief isn't enough. We can and must put politics aside, stand up to the NRA, and work together to try to stop this from happening again.” 
I really don’t know how many times I have heard that statement from a member of congress. “We must pass just a few more laws to stop this from ever happening again.” As I said, laws don’t stop crime. If they did we wouldn’t have the crime we have. An example is a sign in front of a school that reads “This is a Gun Free Zone.” Like Sandy Hook.
I just knew this was coming.
Here is the situation, the left can’t seem to let go of the notion that more gun laws will stop more gun crime. It just hasn’t proven itself. Most of the time the opposite is true. Read More Guns Less Crime by John Lott. Plus the fact that in this specific case no law would have stopped this particular crime or shooter. Not a background check, not a limited capacity magazine, not a law against ugly guns or a one gun a month law. Moreover the full auto that was used, has been illegal by Federal law since the 1930’s and even that law didn’t stop the criminal from acquiring one and using it. Not even on the other side of the Second Amendment the right to carry, no one would have been able to defend themselves against this gunmen, more than 500 yards away and 32 stories up, with a hand gun from the ground.
But reactionaries like Hillary Clinton with her lack of knowledge about guns and ballistics saying: “Imagine the deaths, if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get…” this is not only irresponsible but ignorant. On the other hand, I could say, well… maybe, but there would have had to be an awful lot more going on here than just a silencer to quiet that particular gun enough so that no one would have heard it.  As it was, at first the victims didn’t even recognize the gun fire for what it was anyway, and then no one could tell where the shots were coming from. 
The truth is, the only way to significantly quiet that kind of firearm, which was a high powered fully automatic rifle as Mrs. Clinton said, even with a silencer, would be to also use special subsonic ammunition, which is special low power ammunition that would slow the bullet to less than a 1000 feet per second. Slower than the speed of sound. Which would also impede the effectiveness of a high powered rifle. A silencer alone will not eliminate the crack sound that a bullet makes as it pierces the sound barrier moving at 3700 feet per second. A Silencer only has a limited effect on mussel pressure.  This is why silencers are usually used on guns that are very low velocity.  
THE BOTTOM LINE: I only told you all this because Clinton was a law maker and the majority of law makers know next to nothing about guns or the gun laws they write.  They make laws against ugly guns, and assault rifles, as if one can’t be assaulted with any other kind of gun. or anything else for that matter. And then criminals violate the laws anyway, that's what makes them criminals.  

And then their is the little matter of another ridicules law, this time against Bump-Stocks.  Any stock that they have already made illegal, such as stocks with thumb holes and pistol grips and yes even a so-called Bump-Stock isn't an issue or a threat, it's just more ignorant attacks on the constitutional rights of Americans. Anyone who has even the slightest knowledge of semi-autos, knows that if one wants to Bump-Fire a semi-auto one certainly doesn't need to buy a Bump-Stock to rapid fire it.  WATCH.   And then bump-firing or using a bump-fire stock or even 'full-auto machine gun' is not only inefficient but inaccurate.  WATCH.  Moreover, if that is not enough to prove that your law makers are so ignorant about the laws that they are making, especially illegal unconstitutional anti American gun laws, then how about the so-called large capacity magazines that every manufacturer makes for their semi-auto gun.  They ignorantly believe that by limiting the capacity of a magazine they can stop a semi-auto from continuous fire. WATCH.     I could continue to blow away all of the anti-American anti-Constitutional illegal and ignorant so-called gun safety laws but I think you get the idea. 
The Constitutional architects wrote the Second Amendment for a purpose. And that purpose was and still is ‘defense.’ Whether it be personal self-defense or the defense of some other person, or in the defense of a Free State as the Amendment stipulates. FBI statistics show that the vast majority of the time if the victim or a by stander had a gun, the only one shot would be the perpetrator.  The State of Vermont and other states like it, that have no, or few state gun laws have among the lowest gun crime in the nation. And by contrast many of the states or even cities that have the most gun laws have among the highest gun crime like Chicago.
But as I said in this case the perpetrator was a sniper from over 500 yards away, and nothing short of prior knowledge of this atrocity, would have headed off this tragic massacre. Not even a half dozen more gun laws.   
Thanks for listening my friend. Now go do the right thing, pray and fight for truth and freedom. 
- de Andréa
Please pass on this article to everyone on your email list.  It may be the only chance for your friends to hear the truth.
The Fine Print
Copyright © 2005 by Bottom Line Publishing, All Rights Reserved -  Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Disclaimer - The writer of this blog is not responsible for the language or advertisements used in links to referenced articles as source materials.

No comments: