Deconstructing Arguments Against Gun Ownership, Part 2
Click here for Part 1.
Argument 2: But "assault weapons" should be illegal!
Machine guns and assault rifles are not technically illegal, but they are already heavily regulated and obscenely expensive.
AR-15 rifles are not assault rifles or machine guns. They are merely carbines made from modern materials and with better ergonomics than older carbine designs. The "AR" does not stand for "assault rifle," it refers to the original manufacturer ArmaLite Rifle Model 15. The non-military AR-15 has always been semi-automatic only except for a few models produced prior to 1986 as discussed below, and the trigger mechanism used in the typical semi-auto-only AR is very different from that in the military select-fire M-16.
Even if we suppose that assault rifles should be banned, they have a specific definition within the firearms industry. They are select-fire rifles, meaning they can be switched to allow multiple rounds to be fired with each trigger press. As such, they are covered under the National Firearms Act of 1934, a law that is now nearly a century old. Following the National Firearms Act, which was imposed in response to the violent crime that grew out of the prohibition-fueled black market in alcohol and the scourge of yellow journalism, in order to own an "NFA item," a $200 tax stamp (Equivalent to over $3,000 today back in 1934) and extensive background check was required before being "allowed" to own what had previously been completely legal.
While machine guns and assault rifles are not technically illegal under the NFA, the cost of such firearms has become astronomical if legally acquired due to the additional hurdles imposed by the Gun Control Act of 1968 restricting importation of firearms the government does not deem "suitable" and the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 forbidding the manufacture of any domestic machine guns for civilian purchase. Thus, even though inflation has reduced the impact of the statutory $200, the restriction in supply means that even "cheap" fully-automatic rifles or legal conversion kits cost thousands of dollars and are very difficult to obtain even after jumping through the governmental hoops due to a very small supply on the market.
The Clinton-era Federal Assault Weapon Ban only covered cosmetic and incidental features of semi-automatic carbines, and restricted ownership of an arbitrary list of rifles. It had zero effect on actual assault rifles, instead merely turning people into "criminals" of they neglected to follow any arbitrary regulations during that era.
Image credit and relevant article
Of course, none of the above laws stopped the violent criminals associated with the modern black markets resulting from drug prohibition from acquiring machine guns if they want to. After all, they deal in illegal drugs, so their smuggling or cobbling together "illegal" weapons shouldn't be a surprise.
Click here for Part 3.
Click here for Part 4.
If you like this post, please comment, follow, and resteem!
Nice, upvoted and followed! I just did a post on renewing my firearms licence you might like:
https://steemit.com/liberty/@libertyteeth/my-firearms-permit-yeah-right-2nd-amendment-accounts-for-that-is-up-for-renewal
Upvoted and commented on your post. I understand the conflict between obedience and exercising liberty. It also bothers me that my librarian wages are the product of taxation, which is theft. I can only justify it because it is a legitimate service monopolized by government, and like fire protection and roads, it's something we need regardless.
Once again the majority of the argument is an attempt to mislead the public. How about a disclosure as to the anti-anxiety drugs the perpetrator was on that probably account for this behavior that has been categorized by people who knew him as inexplicable? When big pharma is required to disclose the "suicidal thoughts and tendencies" experienced during the clinical trials you know that there had to have been a statistically significant number of people who experienced them.
Any Serenity fans out there can tell you what created the Reavers.
There isn't enough information to draw any conclusions, but it should be obvious that focusing on the tools used in a crime misses the point.
And big pharma's money pays to keep fingers pointed at the tools, be they guns or cars, but never at the highly profitable drugs that might be the underlying cause.
Perhaps I should write a post about how Big Pharma is another example of corporate collusion with the government against the free market, and part of the reason the US medical industry is hardly an example of "free-market failure."
I think you just did. ;-)