Yesterday morning, we all awoke to the news that scores of people were killed or wounded in an Orlando night club by a man of the Islamic persuasion – making this the worst terrorist attack inside our borders since 9-11-2001. His reasons at this point, seem to be because of a public display of affection between two men in front of his children. Of course, that’s not a rational reason at all. Regardless of how a person feels about that lifestyle, it’s not worth the death penalty in this day and age.<\/p>\n
I’ve been scolded in social media because I’m a member of the NRA. But no members of the NRA were shooters in this case, or in any other case of terrorism. So why is this discussion veering off the real subject into an emotional knee-jerk reaction to a tragedy? Someone told me that Austria banned guns and they don’t have anymore terrorist attacks. I think he meant Australia, but, you know, that’s not true either – five terrorist attacks happened or were thwarted in Australia recently. Norway, Belgium and France effectively banned firearm ownership and that hasn’t ended terrorism in those countries.<\/p>\n
The President told us yesterday that it was “easy access” to guns that caused the horrific shooting this weekend. Obviously, he hasn’t bought a gun recently. It may have been that Mr Mateen, the Orlando shooter, bought two guns legally in the days before the shooting, but he was being investigated for terrorist connections by the FBI in 2013 and 2014 and his name didn’t pop hot on a NICS check at the point of sale. Despite suspicions the investigations came to naught. So, the NICS system fails us again like it did in Little Rock, Tucson, Aurora, San Bernadino and Charleston. <\/p>\n
The President recently made a big deal out of “fixing” the gun laws in this country with some Executive Orders – twice. Neither of which had much to do with fixing the NICS system. None of these guns used in the instances mentioned above are being bought at private sales or in gun shows, yet the President and Hillary Clinton think that they can convince you that they can quell gun violence by plugging these non-existent loop holes. Bernie Sanders said yesterday the we need to ban the sale of “automatic weapons” – those sales have been banned for the general public since the 1930s. “Automatic weapons” haven’t been used in crimes since then – so Bernie is flailing just like the rest of them.<\/p>\n
The truth is that criminals always find a way around laws – like in Norway, Paris and Belgium. The only people who won’t have guns are the potential victims. Like the ones in that nightclub the other night. Florida doesn’t allow guns to be carried in places that serve alcohol. So it was like a big gun free zone. That’s how 100 people end up victims.<\/p>\n
But, if the government was serious about gun violence, they’d enforce the laws that they already have on the books in an effective manner. The truth is that people feel safer when the government writes more laws, legislators are better at writing news laws than they are at enforcing those same laws against criminals. The most recent example of that is the case of Lance Whipple<\/a> who was a felon in possession of a concealed weapon – he was sentenced to two days in jail from his seven days of time served waiting for his wife to pay his bail for his arrest. That doesn’t do anything for gun safety.<\/p>\n We were laughed at when we said that we were fighting terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan so we wouldn’t have to fight them here. Ha-ha – big joke. The government is fighting terrorists as if it’s a law enforcement problem, but the terrorists are fighting it like it’s a war. The government is good at setting up half-wits to arrest with inoperative weapons and inert explosives, but we’ve been warning for years that some fully-witted people are going to be successful at this terrorism thing – and behold! <\/p>\n San Bernadino and Orlando were successful because the government let suspicious people buy firearms because they wanted to be seen like they’re not biased against a terrorist ideology. Meanwhile, they want to further restrict the ability of legal, law-abiding gun owners to arm themselves.<\/p>\n The discussion should be about fighting terror instead of about fighting each other. Terror is the threat – not peaceful, law abiding citizens. However the people that are having the discussion in public can’t even say the word “terror” so how can they fight it? It’s easier to control law abiding people and to appear to care about safety – that illusion works well in an election year.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"