If you are willing to learn, you will learn every single day of your life. If you are analytical, you will learn to tell the difference between what is fraud and what is truth. Unfortunately, not everybody is so keen on conscious learning throughout their lifetime. We see this if you were to set down a firearm on the table in front of someone like myself and someone who is wholeheartedly anti-firearms. Quite a few of the latter will be frozen solid with fear of what is nothing more than an inanimate object, and this is common knowledge. But, there is something about this reaction that is somewhat disingenuous.
As seen in Thunder Roads Louisiana Jan. 2017 Vol. 14 – Issue 1.
Also seen in
With the 2016 Presidential Election done and over with, the NRA has promised a push against standing Federal and State-level anti-firearms laws already on the books. Wayne LaPierre’s comments are seemingly focused on the State-level. The main goal seems to be to make examples out of California and New York. This is, in no small part, because they are the two most restrictive states in the Union and always have been. The last persisting strongholds of the long defunct Federal Assault Weapons Ban. This is somewhat unfortunate, by my viewpoint, due to the opening that has been presented. The ability to take down some important Federal laws (NFA, GCA, Hughes Amendment of FOPA) and fill Supreme Court seats for the settlement of conflicting Circuit Court cases.
In the wake of the latest firearms control laws implemented in California this past month, you’ll see a large number of pro-firearms proponents bailing out of the state within the final months of the year. Some are fighting “Gunmageddon” by petition and by conceptual design, I should add. However, there are other problems with the state of California, and it’s not just California, but most of the rest of our favorite anti-firearms states. The economies in the states of California, New York and New Jersey are horrendous, to say the least. This is driving many of the anti-firearms proponents out of those states as well. And, with them comes their unconstitutional mindsets and votes.
Just about everyone has heard the saying: if you give them an inch, they’ll take a mile. I like to utilize this saying a lot when talking about the Anti-Firearms Coalition (AFC). I also like to specifically use the reference in terms of rope. An inch of rope can still be the beginning of a noose.
Over the weekend, under very stormy conditions, I was standing around on the range talking with three friends. The conversation eventually turned to the ownership of fully-automatic weapons. Of course, there was back-and-forth as of to why civilians should and should not own them. I am a staunch believer that Americans in the United States should be able to own fully-automatic firearms as a means of leveling the field against any aggressor — foreign or domestic. My reasoning behind this, and something that I have been extremely vocal on, is that the assault on one’s rights always starts with one simple thing.