To whom it may concern:
Greetings! My name is Dan Lane and I host a podcast here out of Abilene, TX. A lot of my rants are political as well as most of my following. I have to say that the current rhetoric about gun control and the need to "stop the NRA" has me a little concerned. The fact that kids are now being used as weaponized propaganda to further their agenda to eventually ban ALL firearms is rather gut wrenching. It is clear that the younger generation in America know nothing about history of governments banning guns. Not to mention what transpired after they banned the guns.
I'd like to give you my take on the "assault rifle problem" that we have in this country. First, there is no such thing as an "assault rifle." The AR-15, AK-47, etc., are nothing more than semi-automatic rifles. It is nothing more than their appearance that give these concerned citizens the "creeps." In case it is unclear, the semi-automatic rifles in question operate the same way as any other semi-automatic firearm. Regardless of the current consensus; it is NOT a military weapon nor a weapon of war. A lot of people are saying that the AR-15 was built for no purpose other than to kill people. But what about the other semi-autos that don't look so scary but operate in the same manner?
Definition of "Assault": Verb. Make a physical attack on.
Attack or bombard (someone or the senses) With something undesirable or unpleasant. (Which Britain learned could also be a knife after the gun ban in 1997).
Carry out a military attack or raid on (an enemy position).
Rape.
Now the last time I checked, inanimate objects aren't capable of assault but by the person using that object. So in retrospect, ALL rifles can be termed as "assault rifles". Now here is where the concerns come in. I find it hard to believe that these anti-gun protesters as well as members of congress that are pushing for the ban on certain guns really think that that will stop gun deaths.
Let's evaluate a scenario here. They are successful at banning the AR-15 or any other firearm they view as "assault weapons". What is going to happen when little Billy goes into his father's gun cabinet and decides to go shoot up his classroom with a couple of Glock 9mms? (which are also semi-automatic) How would they propose to handle that problem as more and more shootings are carried out with handguns? Well.. It's simple... We have to ban those now.
Do you see where this is going? If they can successfully ban one type of firearm, they will eventually be able to ban them all.... Certain members of the democratic have openly stated that if they could take all of the firearms, they would.
Just a list of thoughts on "gun control".
It is NOT about controlling the gun. The gun isn't the one out of control.
Enforcing stricter gun laws have done nothing but make the purchase of firearms easier for the criminals and harder for the law-abiding citizens as the black market expands with every new law that is placed. (Chicago, IL)
The average police response time in the mass shooting events have ranged between 8 to 12 minutes from the time the first bullet is fired. (Or more so acknowledged and the 9-11 call is made.) They argue that we should rely on the police in a moment where seconds count. They seem to forget that the police shoot and kill people as well. But let us put all of our trust in them.
How many dead children before they arrive.....? So obviously I support allowing teachers to be commissioned if they so choose to be. (Let it be clear that the politicians that are trying to sell this garbage have commissioned security...)
They allege that banning these "assault rifles" will minimize the number of deaths in the event of a mass shooting because they are capable of holding up to 100 rounds. So I guess if the crazed shooter went in there with only 20 rounds that would be better. I suppose at the end of the day, 10 dead children is less tragic than 20. Are they serious? By that asserition alone, they have to admit that it is NOT a gun problem. It is a people problem.
They want to ban people that are on psyche medications from being able to legally purchase a firearm. Here we go again. Nothing is to stop them from getting them illegally. And what about the veterans that return home from war?
They come back with PTSD and have to take psyche meds in order to sleep at night and forget their dreams. (Many of those cases.) Are we going to disarm them when we trusted them with a gun to go fight a proxy war that was
supposedly fought to protect our freedoms to begin with? Meanwhile, it is the very people running this country that are trying to slowly strip away our freedoms. Seems like we have been fighting the wrong enemy. And imagine the
the reality check the veteran will get when he or she comes home and learns that these tyrants have gutted the 2nd Amendment when they fought to protect it. Just a thought.
In closing, I think that news outlets ought to stop covering these events and worry more about bigger problems in the country. They accuse the NRA of buying off Republicans and Conservatives to remain in business but they don't seem to complain about Planned Parenthood... How much money have they given to the democrats? None of that seems to matter to them while they claim to be "pro-life". Why don't they attack the pharmaceutical companies that produce the very drugs that are making people suicidal and violent??? We have all seen the commercials and the side effects and the law firm commercials that seem to come out 10 years later. Or how about putting a stop to the 130,000 people that die from infections on hospital beds due to malpractice? The list goes on and on.
I am very curious what KTXS has to say about this. I would love to interview or be interviewed. My team and I are preparing to hand out fliers and speak openly on this topic and are striving to give the rights back to the people.