Lunacy in Colorado

I wrote about the 4 anti-gun bills that passed the Colorado House a few weeks ago here, so if you haven’t read that one yet, please do.  But since our state senators love us so much, they’re debating seven anti-gun measures TODAY (and the rest of this week).

If you don’t know who your state senator is, click here:, scroll through the map to find your house, then check the “State Senate 2012″ box on the left.  It’ll tell you which district you’re in.  After you know your district, click here: to find out who your actual state senator is.  Contact him/her.  Now.

But let’s start today by clearing some things up:

  1. I have a right to defend myself.  Scratch that.  I have an obligation to defend myself.  A duty – moral and LEGAL.
    1. Stupid Comment #1: “Well that’s why we have the police.  They’ll protect us.”
    2.  Truth: The US Supreme Court has ruled that the police have no legal obligation even to try and save your life.  If I can use the police to save my life, I will, 100% of the time.  They’re very good at what they do.  So I have nothing against law enforcement.  But protecting my life isn’t in their job description.  Chasing down bad guys after the fact IS.  It’s my job to protect myself – not someone else’s.
    3. Interesting bit of trivia: why do you suppose cops carry guns?  Is it to protect YOU?  No, silly, it’s to protect THEM.  So if we’re allowing police to protect themselves, why won’t we allow everyone else the same opportunity?
  2. Since I have a right to defend myself, I also have a right to the tools by which to defend myself.
    1. Stupid Comment #2: “No one NEEDS an AR-15.  No one needs a shoulder-fired anti-tank weapon.  These proposals are just common sense.”
    2. Truth: There’s a funny thing about the word “need” – you can’t define that for me.  In a society ruled by responsible adults, “need” applies only to your own family.  No one needs a Bugatti Veyron or blue hair or a 55,000 square-foot house, either.  But a funny thing happened along the way: my opinion stopped mattering when it comes to those things.  Like it or not, you can’t define “need” for me and I can’t define it for you.  So unless you want me to start trying, how about we just agree to leave each other alone?
    3. Oh, and by the way, yes I do.  And the US Supreme Court agrees.
  3. The 2nd Amendment applies today every bit as much as it did in 1791.
    1. Stupid Comment #3: “That thing was written when everyone owned muskets.  I’m certain they didn’t envision the AR-15 when they wrote that.”
    2. Tell that to the US Supreme Court.  All of my defensive firearms and target-shooting guns (I don’t have any assault weapons, do you?  Mine are for defensive purposes.) are protected by the 2nd Amendment.
    3. By the way, “AR” stands for ArmaLite or ArmaLite Rifle.
    4. And if anyone thinks that George Washington wouldn’t have appreciated having a few of these things on August 27th, 1776, my guess is that you’d be mistaken.
    5. One other note: is an AR-15 an effective weapon or not?  If they’re so hard to aim, Joe, why do you care about them so much?
  4. Grenade launchers
    1. Stupid Comment #4: “Well you can just go down to Wal-Mart or a gun show and buy a grenade launcher.”
    2. First, really?  I’m in Wal-Mart a lot and apparently I’ve missed the grenade launcher aisle, but you better believe I’m looking for it next time I’m in there.  Maybe it’s between the dog food and the spray paint – I’m rarely in that part of the store.
    3. Truth: a grenade launcher is already one of the most highly controlled items in world history.  As an “area effect weapon,” or Destructive Device,  the ownership and use is already controlled by the National Firearms Act of 1934.  If you DID happen to own one of these babies, letting someone else shoot it is a crime.  And you can’t cross state lines with it.  And where do you buy ammo?  You can’t even let anyone else hold the ammo or you’ve committed an illegal transfer (a crime).  Ask anyone who owns a gun covered under the National Firearms Act how easy that was to obtain – and how likely they are to risk losing it (let alone commit any number of felonies if it’s used or transferred improperly).
    4. And if the stupid comment was true, why aren’t they being used in school massacres today?  In fact, name me the last time a NFA-governed weapon was used in a mass murder?  Go ahead, I’ll wait.  The truth is that lawfully-owned weapons are NOT the problem!  Crazy psychopaths are the problem.
  5. Semi-automatic guns
    1. If you’re going to write or vote on a law that prohibits or restricts semi-automatic firearms, don’t you think you should at least know what one is?
    2. A semi-automatic firearm is one that fires ONE BULLET per trigger pull.  So I pull the trigger once, one bullet comes out.
    3. A full-automatic firearm, or machine gun, continues firing as long as you hold the trigger.  Those are already highly regulated.  See the National Firearms Act of 1934.  But again, those aren’t being used in mass murders – so I guess maybe they’re safer?
    4. Stupid comment #5: these laws will save lives.
    5. Truth: these laws have nothing to do with saving lives.  In Aurora, the nutjob did most of the killing with his Remington 870 pump-action shotgun.  His AR-15 with it’s evil 100-round magazine, jammed.  So if it’s truly about eliminating the tools used to murder civilians in a movie theater, why not start by banning pump-action shotguns?  But then I remembered this:
    7. So there goes your Remington 870.
  6. If Adam Lanza had been wearing a turban and shouting “Allah Akbar” the whole time, would what kind of gun he was carrying have mattered?  No, clearly.  At that point, the discussion would be about how crazy the guy was… or at least how not to call it domestic terrorism.  So why is it that in some incidents we’re very quick to blame the person and in others, it’s obviously the gun’s fault?  Name me one kind of firearm that Maj. Hasan used in the Fort Hood murders.  That’s what I thought.
  7. NONE of these anti-gun bills would have prevented the Aurora theater shooting or Sandy Hook or Virginia Tech or any of them.  Just ask Gov. Hickenlooper.  If this alone isn’t reason enough to stop this lunacy, I don’t know what is.  The truth is that gun-free zones don’t work.

Look, if you hate guns and you think they put your children at risk, then fine: we have a great legal mechanism to changing the Constitution.  To paraphrase Bill Whittle, “it would be called the 28th Amendment, which would only say ‘The 2nd Amendment is hereby repealed.'”  You’d just need 2/3 of both houses of the US Congress plus 3/4 of the states to approve it.  Then you could pass a law in Colorado making ALL guns illegal.  And I pray that our elected officials aren’t that stupid.


One comment on “Lunacy in Colorado

  1. […] question: why would anyone want an NFA gun?  My answer: who cares?  Don’t fall victim to the “need” mentality.  But honestly, there are many great reasons for owning a gun regulated by the […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s