opinion by Tyler Yzaguirre
USA – -(Ammoland.com)- On Friday, April 6, 2018, U.S. District Judge William Young said assault weapons are military firearms and aren’t protected by the constitutional right to “bear arms.” However, he couldn’t be more wrong.
First and foremost, the term “Assault-Weapon” is a made up term by the gun control lobby to strike fear into the hearts and minds of Americans. Gun control activists rely very heavily on fear-based language to persuade Americans that guns are inherently evil, and that the only solution is to pass stricter gun control laws.
Assault is an action; it’s a verb, not a noun. Firearms have no soul, they’re not living objects, and they are not inherently evil. You could put a loaded firearm on a table, leave it there, and unless somebody picked it up, aimed it, and pulled the trigger; the firearm would remain harmless. That settles the debate of “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.”
The origin of this term “Assault-Weapon” is not one hundred percent clear. According to the Nexis News database, the first mention of “assault weapons” appeared in a 1980 New York Times story. Over the past several decades, gun-control proponents have heavily relied on this terminology and have blanket-applied it to any firearm that looked scary.
Secondly, gun-control proponents now slap the term “assault” onto any firearm they don’t like or want to be restricted from public use. The public mistakes the “AR” in AR-15 to mean “assault rifle,” while fake news headquarters CNN, frequently refers to AR-15’s as “assault rifles.” The “AR” in “AR-15” stands for “ArmaLite Rifle,” the company that first manufactured the AR-15 in December 1959.
Thirdly, let’s address the issue of the “AR-15” and how dangerous it is. These are semi-automatic rifles, not “fully automatic machine guns” as some gun control puppets, like Whoopi Goldberg, would have you think. Semi auto firearms have been in public circulation for more than 60 years. It wasn’t until almost 50 years later that we saw one used in a mass shooting.
Furthermore, if we look back at the recent mass murders committed with an AR-15, we see a trend. These criminals should not have had access to a firearm in the first place, or law enforcement failed to act upon credible information.
Nikolas Cruz – Parkland massacre. Police had visited Cruz’s home more than 30 times since 2011. Even worse, the FBI had received tips about Cruz before he committed his horrible act. The first tip on September 24, 2017, when Cruz posted the comment “I’m going to be a professional school shooter,” on a YouTube video, and the second on January 5, 2018, when an anonymous person called the FBI to warn them about Cruz. The FBI admitted to not following established follow up protocols. “Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life,” the FBI said.
Devin Patrick Kelley – Sutherland, Texas Church massacre. Kelley should not have had access to firearms, according to Texas Governor Abbott and current federal law. Kelley was dishonorably discharged from the military, which automatically bars someone from ever purchasing firearms again.
Omar Mateen – Pulse Nightclub massacre. Mateen had been on the FBI’s suspected terrorist list, investigated twice by the FBI for terrorism, and convicted of misdemeanor hate crimes.Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik – San Bernardino massacre. According to then FBI Director James Comey, both were “radicalized” before they started dating each other and that they were “homegrown violent extremists” who were “inspired by foreign terrorist organizations.” Farook and Malik did not purchase their firearms. The firearms used in the massacre were a “straw purchase” bought by Enrique Marquez Jr., who pleaded guilty in February 2017.
Fourthly and finally, an “assault weapons” ban certainly violates the Second Amendment. In 2008, Justice Scalia handed down one of the most historic, landmark decisions in the history of the United States Supreme Court. DC v. Heller held that “the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia.”
In the majority’s opinion written by Justice Scalia, he states that the second amendment protects firearms that are in “common use.” The National Rifle Association estimates that there are more than eight million AR-15s and its variations in circulation. The AR-15 has been in circulation and readily available for purchase, by law-abiding citizens, since 1959. If you’re still not sold on the fact that AR-15s, and its variations, are in “common use” you can read these self-defense stories from 2013 – 2018, in which an AR-15 saved lives and stopped crime.
About Tyler Yzaguirre
Tyler Yzaguirre is the co-founder and president of the Second Amendment Institute, which promotes gun rights through education and activism. Follow him at www.sainational.org .
Why can’t I legally own a bazooka, an rpg or a hand grenade?
A little research often helps …..WW1 …”Assault troops ” from Germany …used in 1918 …. where the termed “Storm trooper” came from …then in WW2 .. the Germans developed a semi and full auto smaller cartridge military rifle and named it an “assault Rifle ” ( Sturm Gewehr or Stg 44 ) for propaganda purposes …In the 1960’s Armalite developed the AR 10 ( .308 ) and then AR15 ( .223) semi automatic rifles which were modified to become full auto military versions ( M 16 in .223 ) . The AR rifles ( for Armalite ) were then commonly… Read more »
One thing is for certain ,if the day comes when they try to confiscate guns you can be DAMNED sure “they ” won’t be the ones trying ! Instead “they ” ,the DAMNED dems/libs will be hiding behind their ARMED security . F**king COWARDS !
So my comments have to be moderated now, Or am I barred?
All firearm laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”, LAW ABIDING CITIZENS, males 16-45=militia. “Regulated”=Trained, Law Abiding Citizens “GOD GIVEN RIGHTS”, IMO
This website blocks comments.
ustice Scalia continued with “It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service — M-16 rifles and the like — may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause.
Facts: District of Columbia v. Heller
Within the court’s prepared opinion Justice Scalia went on to write “we also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. ‘Miller’ said (reading opinion), as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those ‘in common use at the time’ (time of constitution) 307 U.S., at 179, 59 S.Ct. 816. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’”
I apologize for the long answer but it is important to clarify what has been settled by the Supreme Court regarding this issue. On June 26 2008 the Supreme Court ruled in the District of Columbia v. Heller case over the District of Columbia banning hand guns in private homes. This has provided a benchmark for lower courts to rule on regarding the individual’s Constitutional right to bear arms since. Republican Justice Antonin Scalia (Ronald Reagan appointee) wrote the courts prepared majority opinion that provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 infringe an individual’s right to bear arms… Read more »
Actually, Semi auto firearms have been in public circulation for more than 100 years – the Winchester 07 went on the market in 1906, an even earlier the Remington 08 was introduced as the Remington Autoloading Rifle in 1905.