When the People Ignore the Law

A ban on the future sale of Semi-Automatic Mag Fed Rifles (SAMFR), would have no affect on public safety; even if it actually stopped the citizenry from accruing these rifles, and a terrorist was locked into using only a SAMFR, there would still be 3-4 million SAMFR available to buy, beg, borrow or steal. Further thousands of these rifles are bought by law enforcement every year, and as we have seen in Salinas, stealing weapons from the police continues to be a big problem; and of course the elephant in the room is the 2nd Amendment. If we want to stop the violence we need to concentrate on the criminals and terrorists, not guns. As mention France has strict assault rifle possession bands, but that didn't stop the massacres on French soil. The Administration needs to get serious about protecting the us from Islamic Terrorism. Instead DHS has orders not to concentrate on Muslims and a prohibition of investigating mosques, unless a member ask them to. The result is the the US did a good job of identifying suspected terrorist, but were stopped from maintaining their investigation becasue of political correctness.

But there is a larger issue; and that is current owners of SAMFR and magazines that carry more than 10 rounds have simply decided not to comply with these anti-gun laws. Connecticut instituted mandatory registration for SAMFR, compliance was less than 5% and it was also discovered law enforcement officers were the main culprit. Los Angeles and Colorado instituted a law that forbid hi-capacity magazine ownership, compliance in Colorado was less than 5 % and in Los Angeles it was 0%. In a Democracy, the vast majority of the people need to voluntarily comply with the laws (punishment is only meant for the less 1% that are sociopaths). If not, a large section of the population will ignore the law, the result of which is devastating to a representative government.
So what are we fighting for? Let our country's investigative agencies do their job! Don't tie their hands with rules of engagement based on political correctness! The anti-gun zealots tell us he have a gun violence epidemic, when gun violence has been on a decline since the 1970 (50%). The fact that SAMFR continue to be the least used firearm in criminal activity should be a clue that those calling for their ban are not doing so to increase public safety.

The Misdirection of Gun Restrictions

A liberal blogger asked the question, "How many people have died from gun violence because Republicans put the NRA profits above public safety?" If one looks are crime statistics and historical evidence, the answer would be none, because the people die when the crime rates are high, and there is no evidence that the massive increase of gun ownership has resulted in an increase in gun crime, as a matter of fact the opposite is true. Like the issue of background checks, there is no evidence that the gun restrictions would protect anyone or increase public safety. While the left has done a good job of associating guns to crime, the reality is gun violence follows crime rates, not the other way around.

Throughout the country, whether a state had strict restrictions or not, gun violence and homicides fell about the same rate of 50% over the last 20 years, while gun ownership nearly doubled. It is easy to pass laws and demonize guns, but much harder to actually to have real affect on violent violence. The anti-gun zealots say universal back grounds checks are logical and make sense, which on the surface does seem so, the problem is background checks have ever been shown to lower crime rates. Further the system is so flawed that some 80% of those flagged when trying  to buy a gun, are flagged in error. Is this the kind of system that should be expanded?

The same with assault weapons ban. One might buy into the argument that assault weapons and large capacity magazines have the ability to shoot more bullets and kill more people, yet their use in crimes (along with use of any rifles), continue to be very rare; less than shotguns, while their number in the US has climbed to 4-5 million. As a matter of fact, if all the assault weapons disappeared from the country, there is no evidence that it would have any impact on gun violence and/or gun homicides at all; it's simply a scam. Again it is the left simply creating an emergency and divisive issue and pretending they are on the side of public safety, while nothing they are proposing has ever prevented or lowered the amount of gun crimes and/or gun homicides; the problem is not guns, it's crime; and crime is way down so gun crimes are way down. It's that simple.

There Is No Gun Emergency to Respond To (and other Democrat propaganda)

 Gun violence and homicides have been in a downward spiral since 1992; homicides have fallen off so much that suicides out number them 2 to 1; 20,000 out of 30,000 violent gun deaths. It is also well known that the accessibility of guns does not drive gun violence, rather gun violence follows crime trends and crime trends as I said are way down. But that has not stopped Obama and the Democrats from creating a gun crime emergency strawman. The current executive orders are symbolic at best and would not have stopped any of the recent high profile gun murders such as Newtown shooting in 2012. Obama's message to congress,  "pass something; anything" on guns, was an attempt to get congress to buy into this Democrat election year charade; a political strawman built on our nation's sorrow and mourning of the dead children of Newtown; it is as despicable as it sounds and with a tear in his eye, Obama executive orders are at best symbolic and at worse a political ploy to further his agenda.

The Democrats continue to play to the liberal (ie PC) uninformed.

1)They believe that restricting the sales of guns to lawful citizens will reduce gun violence and guns cause crimes; even though as gun ownership has increased, the crime rate has fallen (a assault weapon ban is necessary even though they account for fewer homicides than shotguns). Like the presidents message to congress by Obama; do something; anything (regardless if it has any affect, becasue it's all for show).
2)They believe Islam is a religion of peace even though there is violent jihad, slavery, misogyny and apostasy in the Quran and other Islamic scripture; and ignores the fact that radical Islam is responsible for pretty much all the terrorists violence in the world today.
2b. They believe that Islamic radical jihad is based on retaliation, rather the Quran's promise of a world Caliphate (as if the Clinton Administration did some wrong to the Islamic world the resulted in 911) and 1400 years of Sunni-Shiite warfare.
3)They believe the First Amendment is flawed because it allows diverse belief systems to be voiced, it also allows hate speech and micro-agressions, which they see as a problem unless it comes from a liberals mouth.
4)They believe that Democrats are not responsible for the slavery that caused the Civil War and the continued racism during reconstruction through Jim Crow, the KKK, segregation and poll taxes. Even if the Republicans magically became the racists party that the Democrats were (when Republicans made gains in Presidential elections, the Democrats still controlled most of the state houses in the south through the 60's, 70's and 80's), after 100 years of abolitionists policy and the forcing of civil rights on a racist south, it does not erase the historical damage done to the black psyche by Democrats, that continues even today in the Black Lives Matter movement. They don't see how the Democrats continue to oppress the black community by making it totally dependent on welfare, gave more money to families without father in the house and rewarded young women when they became unwed mothers, and segregated them in high crime low income urban cities they control.
5) There is more, but most of all "they always blame America first"