Saturday, March 2, 2013
Addressing Those Who Support the Banning of Guns in America
by Larry Simons
March 2, 2013
In the wake of the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012, which claimed the lives of 20 school children and 6 school faculty, countless media figures and journalists have come forward with their stance that there should be even more strict gun laws and the banning of semi-automatic weapons.
Piers Morgan, who just may be the single biggest advocate of tighter gun laws and the banning of assault weapons, has devoted most of his shows since the school shooting to addressing the gun violence issue. No doubt, the most explosive of these programs was his January 7 telecast of Piers Morgan Tonight that included the now infamous Alex Jones interview in which Jones exploded with a pro-gun rant that made Ted Nugent look sane. It just so happens, I agreed with every word Alex Jones said [and my readers know how critical I have been of Jones in the last 4 years].
Here is the video of that interview
The mistake Jones made was acting as if the national audience were his own listeners [of his radio show] and then to proceed to erupt in his usual loud hoarse-voiced rants that his own listeners know all too well. For someone who has never heard of Jones or listened to his radio show, it would be easily understandable to think Jones was a raving lunatic and that Morgan was civil, sane and rational.
What viewers of this interview [that have never heard of Jones] did not see or realize, is that Jones was correct on almost every single point and that Morgan had to resort to outright lies and disingenousness to make his points.
Morgan attempted to refute Jones by comparing gun crime statistics between the United States and Great Britain [Morgan's home country]. The first of Morgan's disingenous stabs was asking Jones how many gun murders the U.S. had in 2012. Jones stated there were over 11,000 gun murders, while Morgan stated there were only 35 in Great Britain. Turns out, both men were wrong. The difference is that Jones stated a higher number than the actual number [just under 8,000], but Morgan lied and said 35 when the actual number is 59. The ironic thing about Morgan revealing that there was 35 deaths in England last year [although the wrong number] is that 35 [or 59] is an incredibly high number with a total gun ban in place. That proves gun bans do not work.
What Morgan also failed to mention is the fact that although England's gun violence has dropped [since they banned guns], their overall violent crime rate is over 5 times higher than the United States. What this amounts to is simple: In Great Britain, if you do not possess a gun you will commit a violent act with something else [a rock, knife, crowbar or your own hands].
Morgan also leaves out the 'small', 'unimportant' fact that the population of the United States is over 300 million, while England's is just over 62 million. Stands to reason that if our country has 5 times the amount of people, we will have higher gun violence numbers. It's simple math.
Morgan also omits the fact that although the United States ranks #1 in gun ownership [88 guns per 100 people], it ranks 28th in gun homicide with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people. In contrast, Great Britain is the most violent country in the European Union with 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people. The U.S. has 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people.
Morgan then outright lies and tells Jones that Sandy Hook was the single biggest shooting in the history of America. Jones denies it and says there have been others with death tolls "over 30". Although there have not been other"s" [plural], Jones is correct in denying Sandy Hook was the biggest. 33 people died at Virginia Tech on April 16, 2007. Again, Morgan is a liar.
Morgan then reaches the apex of his disingenousness when he attempts to clearly portray that assault weapons are rampant in overall gun crime when he asks Jones what weapons were used in the last five mass shootings. Morgan, knowing that assault weapons were used, is obviously asking the question to falsely illustrate that assault weapons are everywhere. It's like saying we need to ban cars because the last five incidents of people dying unnatural deaths happened to be in car accidents. It would have been like banning airplanes after 9-11. Jones responds by saying assault weapons are used in a very small percentage of gun crimes.
Jones is correct. Less than 2% of overall gun crimes involve the use of an assault weapon, but the media wants to make it appear as if everyone has one and if you walk inside a grocery store or go pick up your child from school on any diven day, you could be struck down with an AR-15. Complete bullshit.
I also had no problem with Jones continually talking over Morgan and not letting him speak. Morgan does the exact same thing to nearly every guest on his show, especially Second Amendment advocates and gun owners. It was nice to see Morgan receive a taste of his own medicine for once.
Morgan asks Jones, "Why do people need...civilians, need an AR-15 type assault rifle?" Jones responds by, once again, reminding Morgan that they are used in a very low percentage of gun murders. My answer is, "They don't need them, that's why very few people have them. And even fewer use them to commit mass murder". The Second Amendment clearly states that American citizens have the right to be armed. Owning an assault weapon does not automatically make its owner insane. Lanza could have easily killed those same people with a handgun, regardless of what the police response time was.
I am not going to walk inside of a Wal-Mart or a school and start gunning down people simply because I have a weapon that can perform such a task. My mind would already have to be fucked up long before the actual incident. The ownership of an assault rifle does not create a criminal mind. That has to exist prior to the actual access to a firearm. I have told several people already, "The very second Adam Lanza plotted in his mind to kill those people, they were already dead." The assault weapon just happened to be the medium used to advance his agenda.
In addition to Lanza's deranged mental state was the fact that Sandy Hook school, like all other schools that have suffered a similar fate, is a gun free zone. The combination of a fucked up mind and a gun free zone is a death sentence to school children, faculty and staff at every school in America. No one wants to talk about mental health and no one sure as hell wants to talk about the fact that gun free zones essentially allow crazed gunmen to spray bullets onto anyone they please without the fear of gunfire being returned.
The government claims to care about children, yet they do not make their own federal buildings gun free zones, do they? Of course not. They are equipped to the teeth with firearms to protect their precious agencies, while school children and teachers are forced to hide behind desks to shield themselves from speeding bullets.
President Obama claims to care about the children, but no one in America has killed more children right now than Obama himself, with 176 dead children under his belt from drone attacks.
Andy Ostroy is another liberal wingnut that wants the Second Amendment eviscerated. In his December 17, 2012 story, "The Newtown Massacre: Time For Legislation Not Conversation", he says this, "There's no rational or Constitutional basis for Americans to own military-grade weapons. Period."
Yes there is, it's called the Second Amendment.
"The Founding Fathers had Flintlocks, Muskets and single-fire rifles in mind when they drafted the Bill of Rights not 100-round Bushmaster AR-15's, Kalashnikovs or AK-47's."
No Andy, they had arms in mind, whatever arms there are at any given time in history. Of course they didn't have modern weapons in mind; they were'nt invented yet!
Ostroy continues, "There's plenty of room in a civilized society for people to protect themselves, their homes and still shoot helpless deer if they so choose without allowing deadly combat-style assault weapons to end up in the hands of demonic, psychotic monsters". These weapons are only deadly when they are in the hands of "demonic, psychotic monsters". If a sane person would have been carrying an assault weapon that day, he wouldn't have went inside the school and killed anyone. Why? Because a sane person is not crazy, that's why. So, Andy, can we both agree that it's not the gun that was the culprit, but the mental instability, as you have just admitted?
"We are the most civilian-armed nation in the world, and not surprisingly the country with the most gun-related deaths as a result". Wrong. We are 28th in gun homicide, as stated above.
"And if the shooter had a knife instead of a Bushmaster--as gun enthusiasts argue would happen if there were no guns--most of the twenty-seven Newtown victims would still be alive". Really Andy? So, you're saying that Americans are generally people that will confront and overpower assailants weilding knives to save people? Hmmmm....[9-11...9-11...9-11...9-11]
Even funnier, Ostroy says this, "What's more, increasing background checks won't really make a dent either considering that 75% of mass-murders in the United States obtained their weapons legally." What's that tell you, Andy? It tells me the opposite is just as true: You can make all the gun laws you want and ban as many guns as you want. Criminals do not obey laws. They will still get guns. Look at Mexico. Total gun ban there and they have had 50,000 deaths in the past 5 years.
"As expected, we're once again hearing calls for improved mental health care--which could identify and treat these unhinged individuals before they kill--yet the Republican Party, which uses this topic as a convenient diversion from the issue of gun control, has vehemently fought against ObamaCare and any efforts to increase funding for health care." No, Andy, stop lying. They are against forced health care. What does forced health care onto private individuals that can't afford it or may not want it have to do with public mental health?
" It's a convoluted philosophy akin to how they staunchly oppose abortion yet cut funding for sex education and contraception." WTF? Sex education should be taught at home, so stopping funding for that is not necessarily wrong. Cutting funding for contraception makes complete sense if one opposes abortion. Contraception encourages sexual activity, therefore making pregnancy possible. If pregnancy occurs as a result of the lack of contraception, how does that equate with wanting to kill a human being? Ostroy is basically saying "Because I support funding for education and contraception, I want babies aborted". Talk about convoluted!
Ostroy then again admits that mental health is the culprit, not guns, when he says, "Every time some psycho sprays a mall, business, movie theater or a school with bullets we spend days and weeks talking about it and then it quickly becomes a forgotten subject until the next massacre." A sane person with an assault rifle does not spray people with guns. "Psychos" do, as Ostroy admits.
The most offensive and just plain hypocritical part of Ostroy's article was near the end when he addressed gun advocates:
"As these Rambo-wannabe's lay their heads down to sleep each night I want them to first hear the chilling screams of those helpless terrified children. I want them to see the images of those precious faces as they cowered at the feet of the devil-incarnate, as their innocent little bodies were riddled with bullets. I want them to see the blood-spilled classrooms. This is the price they must pay for their colossal selfishness."
First of all, to liken gun advocates to Rambo is just plain ignorant and insulting. Even if it was true, Rambo never killed innocent people in any of the films, unlike Obama, who has killed 176 children with drones. I'd rather be Rambo than Obama.
Secondly, it is Ostroy himself that admitted several times in his article that it is the mental state of these shooters that is the heart of the issue. It is Ostroy that used the words, "demonic", "psychotic", "psycho" and "devil-incarnate" to describe these assassins. Naturally if you give a psycho a gun, bad things will occur. If someone handed me an assault rifle, I do not turn insane through osmosis. It would require a criminal mind to even begin to think of murdering innocent people. A person is a criminal with or without an assault weapon. For Ostroy to put the blood of these children on the hands of all gun owners is just plain stupidity at its finest.
To advocate guns, whether handguns, rifles or assault weapons is not an advocation of murder. Andy Ostroy wants you to believe it is.