Gun Rights “Acceptance”

So in my last post a few people were talking about the dynamic of gun rights in America.

Now given that I’m in my early 30s, I was born into a world of rising popularity, and frankly just about everybody alive today has a similar view, just a question of how high they saw the rise.

But I think we’ll all note that this nation is in its early TWO HUNDRED AND THIRTIES, and our lifetimes are just a small chunk of that. What appears to be a ground-swell of support is actually just a tiny experiment being played out over the course of about 70 years. And as we can see, the experiment failed.

The anti-gun movement was one of lies and deceit, it took a while for the light to be shown on the fact that the laws they propose don’t do what they suggest they will, and the claims they make are untrue. And with that light the tide is turning, as its only natural for people to support human rights, and refute lies.

I’ll end this post with a quote:

Assault weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons –anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun– can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.

That’s Josh Sugarmann executive director and founder of the Violence Policy Center.

This entry was posted in Guns. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Gun Rights “Acceptance”

  1. Jake says:

    What appears to be a ground-swell of support is actually just a tiny experiment being played out over the course of about 70 years.

    The quote from Tam that you included in your last post illustrates this point pretty well too.

    Also, these pistols are tangible artifacts of a very different era. They are from a time when, through most of the Western world, there was nothing terrifically unusual about a gentleman owning a small pistol which he could slip into a coat pocket, should he feel the need for a little insurance.

    That era ranges from the earliest days of practical pocket-sized pistols all the way up to the beginning of that experiment – about 75 years ago. A time when it was perfectly acceptable for a man who anticipated having to pass through a less than ideal part of town to take the pistol from his sock drawer and slip it into his pocket, and if anyone got curious about why he had it, he only had to say “I have to go to X later,” and the response would be “Oh, good idea, then.”

    In the long history of our country, the gun-control era is really just a drop in the bucket – what we’re seeing today is the beginning of the end of that era.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      What we’re seeing today is the ripples stopping from that drop in the bucket. It was never an “era” it was a blip on the radar that maybe got a little more play than it should ever have.

  2. fearsclave says:

    Up here, out antis like to paint gun control as a traditional Canadian value, which is an utter crock. The 1934 handgun registration requirement aside, which was widely ignored and rarely enforced, we only started really regulating firearms in 1974; for the overwhelming majority of our history you could buy pretty much anything and do pretty much anything you liked with it and it wasn’t until the early 1990s that we really started going astray.

    We’re working on rolling things back, as you know.

  3. Thomas says:

    TIs this the part where I’m not supposed to mention how you can make Mini-14s and Mini-30s as well as semi-auto FALs into MGs by wedging a matchstick in the right place and breaking it off and won’t have permanently modified the firearm into a MG and if you remove the bit of wood before it’s examined it’ll be perfectly stock and legal and of course nobody knows that if you remove the disconnector from an AR it’ll generally run FA pretty happily, as often as not???

    NFA and GCA needs to go away, not semi-auto firearms.

    Gimme five minutes on the bench and a file or grinder and any of your 1911s are ready-made burp guns…

    Is speaking factually about firearms technology as I just did “giving ammunition to the Josh people of the world”?
    It’s factual. In a way the Brady people are right. Any semi can easily become a MG. So what?

    Insert Animal here from the Old Anti-Nowheres
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKtG2APixAg
    So WHAT? SO WHAT? SO F*CKING WHAT?

    This post brought to you by the dude that decorates his living room with LMGs and Howitzer shells to match the dead animal and grenade motif.

    A gun is a gun is a gun is a gun is a gun. A knife is a knife is a knife is a knife is a knife.

    Regulating tools is not a proper response to bad behaviors.–Jeff K.

    • Thomas says:

      On a tangential theme that came up at “American Mercenary”, if Olofson wanted an AR-15 MG with hammer follow down, he would have just pulled the disconnecter, he wouldn’t have made any modifications other than that to the firearm and could easily replace the disconnecter in 30 seconds and there would be no evidence of anything wrong other than people heard a couple three round burps followed by a jam. Wouldn’t have required any “M-gun” parts. Therefore, that’s pretty good proof it was a known malfunctioning firearm, not an intentional MG. If he had wanted to build a M-16, he had the training and ability and access to parts as a Guardsman…why would he do it halfway and broken? Some poster may have been talking to Len on the phone this afternoon about the travesty of that case… 🙂

    • Weerd Beard says:

      I’m assuming based on your statements you’re simply talking about making a gun that will “run away” fire until the mag is exhausted, regardless of trigger position.

      I suspect using the right ammo my WASR-10, and certainly my SKS were “Full Auto” by that definition when still packed in grease.

      • Thomas says:

        Single pull of the trigger and you would have been a felon, depending on which parts were jammed up.

        Bulgy WASR kits just hit the playing field again for 180USD if you want another one, with US barrels 240.

      • Thomas says:

        FWIW, it is MUCH SIMPLER to homebuild a MG than to homebuild a proper semi or selectable. The mechanics are at about the level of the 4th grade summer engineering bright kid school at the local college when I was a tyke. And if a person sets a low cyclic rate like BARs, then you can easily fire single shots too. Do not try this at home, all NFA rules apply, but when it comes down to it, GOD GOD DAMMIT DAMMIT, either you let people own guns or you don’t, what kind of guns shouldn’t make a flying fook. Irrelevant.

        • Dixie says:

          The Soviets made SMGs at Stalingrad when they were surrounded by the Nazis and eating each other. It’s harder to convert a PPSh to semi than it is to build one from scratch. Which makes me envious that my favorite gun dealer has one converted to semi-auto… and 9mm NATO.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *