In encouraging news, several local guns rights groups are raising funds to fight back against the state of Connecticut’s recent passage of gun laws that strip law-abiding citizens of their right to own certain firearms and instantly turns regular citizens into criminals (New York, anyone?). The National Rifle Association has joined forces with these groups to add some fire power to the cause of second amendment freedom and liberty.
The groups include the Connecticut Citizens Defense League, the Coalition of Connecticut Sportsmen and Disabled Americans for Firearms Rights. Gun shops and other firearms clubs from the state are helping to raise money by donating to a legal defense fund to help the group wage legal challenges against the new gun-grabbing laws. The first lawsuit was filed this week by the group.
The new Connecticut gun laws include a ban on so-called “assault weapons” and prohibits the use of high capacity magazines, two provisions that have demonstrably little effect on preventing gun crimes.
According to a survey from PoliceOne.com, more than 15,000 police officers resoundingly believe that the gun controls being discussed in Congress and passed in several states are meaningless to public safety and will not reduce violent crime.
Asked what effect the White House’s position on gun controls would have in improving police officer safety, more than 60% said “none”. Asked if the assault weapons ban would reduce violent crime, more than 70% said “none”. 95% of officers surveyed said that magazine limits will not reduce violent crime.
Once again, those most intimately involved in stopping violent crime and experienced in the lawful use of firearms resoundingly believe most of the proposed gun controls to be ineffectual on their face. The majority of officers believe that stiff penalties for those who commit a crime with a gun would do more to curb violent crime than trying to remove guns from the hands of law-abiding citizens, something I wrote about recently.
The New York Times published an editorial today praising the Tucson, AZ City Council after their move to require background checks at gun shows before firearm purchases can be made. The author went on to mention the 2011 Tucson shooting that killed 6 and injured Congresswoman Gabriel Giffords, referring to the gun that shooter Jared Loughner carried as an “assault weapon”.
Loughner carried a Glock 19 (pictured to the right), a mainstream, run of the mill 9mm semi-automatic pistol. Our government and media have cleverly managed to make a segment of our populace believe that anything short of a revolutionary musket or 18th century Derringer (the weapon that John Wilkes Booth used to kill Lincoln) to be “assault weapons”, a term coined in the media to elicit thoughts of senseless violence and murder – a bloodbath.
A link to the entire editorial is below. To those who believe I’m giving this author undue exposure by making light of this story, you’re exactly right. I want people to recognize how dangerous this discussion has gotten, and how close we are to re-defining the term “assault weapon” to mean almost anything, giving the government ample opportunity to significantly expand their weapons bans.