March 04, 2005

Another evil gun story

Type: Double Action Only or Single Action (in Tactical model)
Chambering: 5.7x28mm SS190
Length: 208 mm
Barrel length : 122.5 mm
Weight: ca. 620 g with empty magazine; ca. 760 g loaded
Magazine: 20 rounds

Seems that the GFW's of New Jersey are all atwitter because a dreaded "assault" pistol was found in the (illegal) possesion of a suspected drug dealer. Do they go after the criminal for an illegal buy?, No, they go after the weapon. The fact is that this weapon is not availible to the general public, so the fact that a non military/law enforcement had possession of it is what should be cause for concern, not the weapon itself. There is NO such thing as an "assault pistol" this is just a weapon with a specialized type of ammunition that has a higher capacity to defeat body armor.

I have a very large problem with one passage in the story:

The lawmakers said there is no legitimate reason for members of the general public to own the gun _ you wouldn't buy it for hunting, for example.

"This is not a Second Amendment issue," Corzine said. "Who needs one of these? The only reason is for violence."

The fact is that the Second Amendment is NOT ABOUT hunting in any case, it's about the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms in their own protection, whomever the attacker might be. The Founding Fathers regarded it as the ultimate check against a government turned tyranical.

And for the second point, ALL guns have the capacity for being used in a violent manner, this weapon is no more or less than any other. The ammunition is designed to penetrate body what? Criminals can't wear body armor too? This ammunition isn't the first round capable of defeating body armor, nor will it be the last. The point is, prosecute those that misuse the technology, don't restrict the technology. I was a LEO for over ten years, and every time I put on that uniform, it was with the realization that I may not come home to my family after the end of my shift, that was one of the facts of life of the job.

I am a firm believer that anyone who has not demonstrated criminal or mental problems has the right to be armed, and the bearer has the right to whatever weapon will stand him in the best stead. In carrying a weapon, the bearer must ALSO assume the responsibility not to misuse it and be liable to punishment if he does.

Most people will not choose a weapon such as the FN Five-seveN, for myself, I would wish that it would remain an option open to me. I'm sure that if the hero in Tyler Texas had had one, the incident may have turned out very differently, with at least one less loss of life and two less injuries to POLICE OFFICERS. Just some food for thought....

Posted by Delftsman3 at March 4, 2005 01:51 AM

I am petrified of guns. Yes I know guns don't kill people. People kill people. If they don't have guns they'll use whatever is available to them. Be it knives, baseball bats, or cars. Still guns terrify me.
Still I believe every American (well those who haven't comitted a felony) should have the right to own one if they choose to do so.
I see no sense in blaming the gun for the crime. I remember hearing someone say, when you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have the guns or something like that. I agree. The criminal element in this country, or any country for that matter, will find a way to secure the weapons they want. Legal or otherwise.
How about that, we actually agree on something!
Have I ever said thank you for visiting my blog and keeping us lefties on our toes? I do appreciate your presence and your opinions!

Posted by: wanda at March 4, 2005 08:27 AM

I an extremely gratified that this is one of the (few) issues that we DO agree on Wanda; it's one of the bedrock issues in our country.

"I remember hearing someone say, when you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have the guns or something like that."

I don't remember who said that either, but, as they say, the "proof is in the pudding". In every locality in the US where the strictest gun control laws have been enacted, it's a truism that "only criminals have guns" (well, criminals and certain Liberal anti-gun Senators)and violent gun crime has gone up. When citizens can no longer have the means to protect themselves, they are no longer citizens, but subjects.

Thank You for allowing me to put my 2 cents in on your blog. We may not agree on much, but the interaction helps us both define and defend our positions. I certainly welcome you to do the same here, help me stay honest!

Someday I hope to welcome you into the VRWC.LOL.

You are honest enough that maybe when you really learn the facts of an issue and not just go with the DNC/Al Jazeera talking points and "feelings" as the Gospel, you will have an epiphany and join me over here on the "dark side". Well, I can dream anyway...

Posted by: delftsman3 at March 4, 2005 08:00 PM

New Jersey Democratic Sens. Jon Corzine and Frank Lautenberg, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., might have known it. The liberal disarm the public scheme really works, Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Canada have all shown the great reduction in crime their policies have made. I'm all for arming the general public and executing on the spot any and all drug dealers found possessing drugs or a gun.

Posted by: Jack at March 4, 2005 11:19 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?