Despite the Ban-Guns Rhetoric – People, Not Firearms, Are Responsible

By Dave Dalton

Dylann Roof
Suspected Killer, Dylann Roof is responsible, not guns.
American Gun Owners Alliance
American Gun Owners Alliance

Washington, DC – -(Ammoland.com)- Within less than 24 hours of the South Carolina shooting, while the bodies of the victims still await a proper burial, those with a anti-gun platform began screaming about guns.

Sadly it's not surprising in this modern age of over-sensationalized partisan rhetoric by politicians, community leaders and the media.

Even President Obama entered into the fray stating ‘at some point we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries'.

First off I have to ask. Does this man actually watch the news? Has he seen the attacks in the UK, Canada, Sweden and China? When religion and race are an issue every country in the world suffers from these type crimes.

His comment of course only plays into his parties agenda, namely complete control over every firearm in the country. It's not an overstretch to say that as many far left liberals have called for outright bans, even confiscation of firearms over the past few years since the tragedy at Sandy Hook. After each case of violence they parade up to the podium one after the other to decry ‘gun violence‘ and call for more laws. But what will those laws do?

California's Dianne Feinstein has introduced multiple bills calling for a ban on ‘high-capacity‘ magazines. Yet this latest incident was carried out using a firearm that has the lowest capacity magazine of just about any modern day handgun (7 rounds, the killer was said to have reloaded 5 times). This firearm, and it's magazines, are 100% legal under the New York ‘SAFE Act', in California and New Jersey, states which have the toughest gun laws in the nation. As many gun rights advocates have stated over the years one does not ‘need‘ a ‘high-capacity' magazine to commit such an atrocity. All that is required is multiple magazines or the time to reload.

Several Democratic representatives have also stated there is a greater need for ‘gun free zones‘. Anyone with an ounce of logic in their head would see that just about every single one of these ‘mass shootings' was in fact committed within a ‘gun free zone'. Even the latest tragedy happen in one because South Carolina law states carrying a firearm is illegal in a:

‘church or other established religious sanctuary unless express permission is given by the appropriate church official or governing body'. South Carolina §23-31-215 (M)(8).

Sandy Hook was a gun free zone. The theater in Aurora is a gun free zone. The Baltimore shipyard is a gun free zone. Fort Hood is a gun free zone. The reason these shootings happen in these places is because the criminals, and yes they are criminals, know they will not have to worry about anyone shooting back. Anyone that says otherwise is flat out lying.

And think about that gun free zone and how terrorists could exploit it!

Gun Free Zones
Gun Free Zones

What is amazing though, is that all these ‘talking heads', and I lump the President into that mix, refuse to say what really needs to be said. That is, that we have a huge mental health issue in this country and we have media that cares more about making a buck than they do actually reporting actual events without the sensationalism. You may think those two don't mean much together but I believe they do.

We know several, if not all, of the criminals that have perpetuated these horrendous acts have been diagnosed with mental problems, and were on prescription drugs, yet they either ignored treatment or chose not to seek it. Why exactly we will probably never know, but one thing we do know is seeking help for a mental issue is both expensive and carries a stigma.

The other side of this is how overtly sensationalized the media has become, anyone that denies that is also flat out lying.

So what happens when someone who has mental issues, or is borderline gets pounded day after day after day with this sensationalized tripe they call the news? What effect can it have on their behavior and any impulsive, and potentially deadly, actions they may take?

Let's take the case of this most current shooting. While it is obviously driven by racism isn't racism really a ‘mental health issue'? I can only wonder, after watching how the news outlets have handled the events over the past several months in places like Ferguson Missouri and Baltimore Maryland, how that sensationalized nonsense would effect someone who suffers from the mental disorder of racism? I have commented to my wife several times over the past months while watching the news that this was more than likely going to create a huge backlash from those that are racist. Unfortunately I think we have just seen the first case of this.

So either we start talking about the real issues or we will continue to see acts like this. It's a fact. Until Washington and all the state capitols start looking at real issues and stop parroting the same old song we will watch in horror as those with agendas and mental issues commit these atrocities.

The ‘gun‘ didn't walk over to Sandy Hook and kill those innocent children, a human being did. The gun did not walk into that church, sit down for an hour, and then shoot those innocent people, a human being did. The anti-gun movement will always point to the intimate object while ignoring the human being that pulled the trigger. They would say the common connection in every event is the gun. I say the common connection is the human being.

We have seen mass attacks with knives, machetes, vehicles, bombs and other inanimate objects yet no one has come out to say they were the cause. No, when it happens with one of those it's the human beings fault. So why the difference when a gun is involved?

Dave Dalton – founder American Gun Owners Alliance
http://amgoa.org

About American Gun Owners Alliance

The American Gun Owners Alliance strives to be a communication system for gun owners that can be trusted to provide verified, honest information they would not normally have the means, direction, or knowledge to get otherwise. AMGOA seeks to bring every person who supports the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, from all facets and subsets of that term, together, as one voice. It endeavors to do so through facilitating information both to and from them, so that all factions of firearm owners, be they hunters, sport shooters, self defense orientated, non-gun owner supporters, activists, men, women, or whatever their creed, can communicate effectively. http://amgoa.org

  • 3 thoughts on “Despite the Ban-Guns Rhetoric – People, Not Firearms, Are Responsible

    1. First off, “Racism” is NOT, in any way, a mental illness; it is a political/social belief system. It may or may not be accurate, and it may or may not, be delusional. If it is a mental illness, then we probably have a HUGE number of Blacks who suffer from it, including our President. Treating a social or political belief as a mental illness is something the Russians and Chinese Communists did (still do?), not something we do in America. The KKK, the American Nazi Party, and the New Black Panther Party, ALL hold, and propound, racist social beliefs (albeit different ones). So do various religious organizations including Louis Farrakhan’s church, many Muslim sects (including ISIS), and the Christian Identity church movement, again differing only in the specific races (or religions) they disfavor. This is an inevitable consequence of religious freedom and freedom of expression, such as we (pretend to) have in America, and which are supposed to be protected under the 1st. Amendment of our Constitution. Murder, whether mass or individual, remains a crime everywhere in our country, and frankly, I see little reason to differentiate whether the underlying rationale was hatred of a specific race or “protected group,” or of an individual. Young Mr. Roof initially appears to have been “radicalized” by some anti-Black beliefs, but this kind of attack could just as easily have been carried out by a member of ISIS, and could have been directed against any type of religion or race an individual dislikes and has learned to denigrate, fear, or hate. There is no need to postulate any sort of “mental disorder” to explain the behavior of a murderer. Simply having learned to hate or fear others, to a degree that seems to justify taking their lives, is enough explanation in itself. The presence of guns in our society is quite irrelevant to this motivational issue. In fact, the availability of guns is far more likely to prevent, than to cause, such attacks to occur, but there is no way to prevent “radicalized haters” from acting violently. The presence of laws prohibiting (note I didn’t say “preventing”) murder, carrying a gun in a church without special permission, discharging a firearm within the city limits, etc. obviously did nothing to deter, much less prevent, the Charleston SC shooting. New laws intended to make it more difficult for people to obtain guns will not, cannot, work any better than the existing laws did. Criminals and those who wish to commit murder and mayhem are not affected by them at all. Today, felons (who are prohibited by law form possessing guns) have ready access to them through the black market on the streets. Enacting of new laws that make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens (the only ones who follow them) to obtain guns legally simply create a bigger and more readily available black market in “street guns” that have usually been stolen to begin with. This helps only the criminals and haters, not the society as a whole. What would help the society as a whole, is greater availability, and especially, a greater presence in the public sphere, of guns in the hands of the law-abiding citizens, who could act to thwart violent acts of this type. The mere possibility of the presence of such armed citizens appears to have a discouraging effect on violent criminals. But even if it didn’t, socially responsible citizens, who go armed in public, would be able to take action to stop violent crimes when they encounter them. Unarmed citizens generally cannot do so effectively.

    Leave a Comment 3 Comments