Assault Weapons vs Drunk Drivers

Dear “assault weapons” opponents, don’t you think you are attacking the wrong enemy?  How many people were killed by Bushmaster AR15s in 2011.  Heck, how many people were killed by any rifle defined as an “assault weapons“?  Let’s say that every murder committed using a rifle was an “assault weapon“.  That would be 323.  Versus 728 who were beaten to death.

But that’s not what this is about.  This is about an entirely different type of “murder”.  A type of murder that isn’t even tracked by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).  But the CDC does track it.  We’re talking DUI involved deaths.  In 2010 10,228 people were killed in which alcohol was a factor.  In 2010 8,874 people were killed by all firearms (and 361 by any type of rifle).  Grimly, 13, 164 people were murdered. Thirteen per cent fewer people were killed by firearms than by drunk drivers.

I’m ignoring all motor vehicle deaths (32,885) because fault really isn’t assigned, some may have truly been accidents that can’t be attributed to any driver (ever seen a car that hit a deer?).  But if you read News of the Weird you’ll be familiar with the phrase “police believe that alcohol was involved”.  For 10,228 people that was the case.

Over half of the children killed in DUI accidents were in the car with the drunk driver.

In the roughly 45 minutes it’s taken me to research this article, compose it and type it in, 1 person has died in an alcohol involved motor vehicle accident.  It will be another 15 minutes or se before a person is shot to death.  We’re not going to talk about “assault weapons” because I don’t feel like waiting until tomorrow.  In the roughly 120 days since Sandy Hook, 2917 people have been murdered by handguns.  And 3362 people were killed by drunk drivers.

Get real Mr. President.  Get real Senator Feinstein.  Step up, show some real guts and attack a real problem.  Once you get DUI deaths below “assault weapons” deaths then we can talk about banning “assault weapons“.  But until then, you’ve got the wrong target.


Define “militia”. Define “regulated”.

Well, there are a bunch of people who insist on saying that “a well regulated militia” as being one controlled by governmental authorities.  But that’s not exactly how it works, or has ever worked.  Militias are, by their very nature, extragovernmental.

I’m sure that no one would argue that the “Minute Men” in Lexington and Concord were controlled by the British in any way.  In fact it was the British intent to seize weapons from these people (erh, umh Assault Weapons).  In Concord the men actually drilled in the face of a Tory mayor.  For a while, until he found Boston to be a much friendlier place.

The First Continental Army consisted of mostly militias, not organized companies, battalions, regiments and divisions.  And when the Constitution was written there was no provision establishing a standing army, nor did the authors and signers favor such a thing.  In fact, the Third Amendment prohibited the quartering of troops in private houses without consent of the owner.

Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1 establishes the President as “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States”.  But it doesn’t actually establish an Army and Navy of the United States.  And the “Militia of the several States” frequently held themselves as individual groups even within a state.  A Volunteer Militia of Philadelphia might have a commander who would have little if any communication or co-ordination with the Wilkes-Barre militia.

The Second Amendment didn’t establish any sort of regulation since it didn’t propose a form of this regulation.  Rather, “regulated” means to fight, especially fire, in a coordinated manner. At the time of the American Revolution opposing sides fired at each other in volleys, with each side in rows between two and five deep.  The troops had to be able to stand, fire, kneel and load and then repeat this process, all in a coordinated, or regulated, manner.

A group of volunteer civilians who have drilled together being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Guns aren’t living beings

I recently heard an interview on NPR where the speaker said she had “no use for guns” and that “guns are evil”.  Well, I respect her opinion that she has no use for guns.  That’s her option.  I’m sure everyone has one or more things for which you might say “I have no use for niblicks”.  But are niblicks evil?  No more so than a gun.  I’d love to be able to blame a niblick for my double bogie game, but it’s not the club’s fault.  I’m sure the speaker would love to blame the gun, but it’s the fault of the holder.   It’s not the car’s fault, no is it the beer’s fault.  It’s the driver who choose to get in the car and drive after the beer(s) fault.

We try to blame inanimate objects for consequences of human actions.  And we frequently blame all of these inanimate objections for the actions of a few humans.  “We” did it with “Demon Rum”, so why not guns?

Whenever two human beings interact and something bad happens, a human is to blame.  A machine has no feelings, no thoughts, no intents.  But we humans all want to pass the blame to someone or something else, to put it out of our control.

1000 to 1

Okay, I recently saw someone say that there are about 100 million gun owners in the US.  The latest numbers I have say that there were around 100,000 crimes committed using firearms.  So, worst case, there are 1000 gun owners for each criminal.  Worst case.  That would assume that every crime was committed by a different person.  Yeah, that’s not very likely.  In many cases the same person commits a crime.  I’m willing to say that my ratio is closer to 3000 to 1.  And the 300,000,000 guns?  That would make the number somewhere around 9000 to 1.

It was a one time stat but the Bureau of Justice Statistics came up with an average of 4 and a fraction shots fired when a single shooter was involved and around 11 or so when two people were shooting at each other.  Most interesting?  Cops tend to go through more rounds than crooks.

Now anyone can muscle around numbers any way they want to.  Just ask Sens. Feinstein or Schumer.

How do you enforce an unenforceable ban?

So Colorado is about to “ban” high cap magazines.  But what keeps my friends from coming down for a visit and picking up a couple dozen?  Or driving across the border (not a state line anymore) into New Mexico or Utah and loading up the trunk?  And how does The State prove that the mag came in after the ban?  Are they going door to door and asking?  I guess that DPMS will just put a date on all of their mags to show when they were made.  Right?

I keep wondering why legislators think that more laws are good when the current laws are being enforced.  You can insert your own views as to which set of laws you wonder about, but I’m talking guns here so guns it is.

If every murder and assault with injury involving a firearm was committed with a high cap magazine and each was with a unique magazine, that would still leave somewhere north of 100 million magazines unaccounted for.

“Lie and try”

I just picked up my newest “gun”.  Actually the part treated as a gun.  The lower receiver for an AR-15.  I had to fill out a form that asked me things like “are you under indictment for a felony?”, “have you ever been convicted of a felony?”, “are you a fugitive from justice?”, “are you illegally in the United States?”

Yeah, I’m going to say “I’m on the run from the law” and stand around while the US Marshalls drop by the store.  “But you have to give your name and other ID.”  Ever heard of identity theft?  I’m willing to bet there’s a flea market near you where you can get a driver’s license and  social security number of a “legitimate” person.  Now the guy down the street would need one that said “Asian” (as if he could pass himself off as a middle aged balding white guy).

The thing is though, doing this is a crime.  Actually it’s Federal offense.  A felony.  But being a felon in possession of a firearm is also a felony.  In most states it’s both a Federal and a State felony.  It’s a misdemeanor to be illegally in the United States as well as a felony to possess a firearm.

So is any kind of background check going to keep a criminal from buying a gun?  Instant, three day wait or ten day wait?  You know who are criminals?  People who commit crimes.

How many people have actually been prevented from buying firearms because the foolishly told the truth (but thank you for being honest because if you answered “Yes” you shouldn’t have a firearm)?  Then look at how many have been prosecuted.

Do background checks actually work?  Not if you look at the number of people prevented or prosecuted.  Not if you look at the number of people who use fake ID’s.

Let’s shoot 1.6 billion people

About a month ago, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ordered 21.6 million (with a M) rounds of .40 S&W. To go with the 1.6 billion (with a B) rounds it already has. So we have to ask a couple of questions.  I’ve got to admit, they do have to keep those three (or more) high cap mags they carry full up.  And, honestly, I don’t know how much of that is actually .223 (M16, assault rifle) ammo.  Which they need to keep the three or four (or more) 30 round mags topped off.

And why does the Social Security Administration need any at all?  Although I guess there probably are a couple of 65 year old guys who are pissed about their checks.

There were all sorts of stories in January and February about runs on ammo.  But that’s nothing compared to the runs that the Feds have made over the last two years.  Enough that even local LEOs have been complaining.

Which gets me asking the question. If “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazines” are “only good for killing people” then


Comments please.