Benjamin Franklin Said It Best

a
by Marion P. Hammer

In the 1970's gun prohibitionists sought to outlaw handguns by calling them "Saturday Night Specials." "SATURDAY NIGHT SPECIAL" became a media buzz-word. The term could not be defined. But some folks thought they knew what it meant and had a mental image of these undefinable blacked-in silhouettes of handguns that were appearing in newspapers and on TV screens every time the news report was on crime.

Gun banners claimed these handguns "had no sporting use, no hunting use, were are not suitable for self-defense, that their only purpose was for killing people and that they were the weapons of choice of criminals." But, truth prevailed and reality emerged when people realized that the definitions used would have banned the majority of all handguns. "Saturday Night Special" was an emotional term designed to engineer the banning of all handguns. It didn't work.

So then the gun ban crowd switched to trying to ban so-called "COP KILLER BULLETS." Another undefinable emotional term created to evoke fear and horror. They claimed no honest citizen needed these bullets that "have no sporting use, no hunting use, are not suitable for self-defense, whose only purpose is for killing police, and is the ammunition of choice of criminals."

In fact, the particular bullet they were talking about had been designed for law enforcement use and was not generally available to the public. Another obscure fact was that there was no record of any law enforcement officer ever having been shot with one of these so-called "Cop Killer Bullets," much less killed. Yet many media outlets used artist's sketches of police officers lying in puddles of blood when they talked about "Cop Killer Bullets." Some of the definitions they were trying to use, under the guise of protecting police officers, would have banned as much as 90% of all ammunition. "Cop Killer Bullet" was just another emotional term designed to engineer the banning of a wide range of ammunition. It didn't work.

Next gun prohibitionists attempted to ban so-called "PLASTIC GUNS". Again, it was an emotional term. There were, and are, no all-plastic guns - except toys. Yet, gun banners claimed these "plastic guns" were not detectable in airport security systems. The gun they claimed to be attacking was the Glock 17, and we saw silhouettes of the Glock 17 in the media when they talked about banning "undetectable plastic guns."

In fact, the Glock 17 contains over a pound of steel and was (and is) clearly detectable on security devices in place in every commercial airport in this country. Nonetheless, they claimed these plastic guns "have no sporting use, no hunting use, are not suitable for self-defense, that their only purpose is for killing people and that they were the weapon of choice of terrorists and other criminals." The definitions they were using to try to ban "plastic guns" would have banned millions of commonly owned handguns. IS ALL OF THIS BEGINNING TO SOUND FAMILIAR? IT SHOULD!

Because today they're trying to ban so-called "ASSAULT WEAPONS." Another emotional term that cannot be defined. Many people think they know what the anti-gunners are talking about when the media shows menacing looking blacked-in silhouettes of guns, but they are wrong. They have been deceived. Gun banners claim these are military firearms that have "no sporting use, no hunting use, are not suitable for self-defense, that their only purpose is for killing people and that they are the weapon of choice of criminals." SAME DECEPTIVE SONG, DIFFERENT VERSE, FOLKS!

One only has to look at the language that the group "Ban Assault Weapons NOW" (BAWN) used for a proposed constitutional amendment for the Florida Ballot. It was deliberately deceptive and would have banned ALL semi-automatic rifles and shotguns. Further, it contained language that mandated "surrender" of legally owned firearms or face "government confiscation." The Florida Supreme Court was not fooled and kicked the amendment off the ballot. But BAWN is still trying to raising money and claims they will be back.

Semi-automatic technology is over 100 years old and almost all semi-automatics are functionally identical. There is nothing mystical or magical or super powerful about them - some of them simply have stock configurations that look different and somehow are menacing to people who are uneducated on the subject of firearms.

Banning guns is not the answer to stopping crime or criminals. Banning guns can only be viewed as a means of controlling the America people and destroying freedom.

Regarding why Japan did not attack the U.S. mainland after Pearl Harbor Admiral Yamamoto is widely quoted and saying, "to invade the United States would prove most difficult because behind every blade of grass is an American with a rifle."

As long as law-abiding Americans have their guns and their rights as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, there is hope for preserving Freedom. Give up your guns and your constitutional rights and you are no longer free.

No one has said it better than a man of great wisdom many decades ago:

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania [1759]

Twitter icon
Facebook icon
Google icon
Del.icio.us icon
Digg icon
LinkedIn icon
Newsvine icon
Pinterest icon
Reddit icon
Yahoo! icon
e-mail icon

InMotion Hosting SSD Servers