Whenever some jerkoff mass murders people with a semi-auto rifle we have the usual suspects lining up to screech “‘Assault weapons’ have no legitimate purpose! They are designed solely to kill!”
Ok, so what?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know. They’re also good for target and sport shooting, as well as hunting. Anyone who owns an AR knows several things they can do with it that don’t involve killing anyone. But go with me for a second. For the purposes of argument, let’s pretend that the gun grabbers are correct. Let’s pretend that there is LITERALLY nothing else I could do with my AR-15 besides killing people.
So what? Really, SO WHAT?
I carry a handgun. I don’t carry it because I think an IDPA match will suddenly spring up. I don’t carry it because I’m hoping for a deer to pop up so I can whack it for dinner. I carry a handgun in case I meet someone who needs to get shot. I would hate to meet a person who needs to get shot and not be able to oblige him by shooting him. My handgun’s primary usefulness is to shoot people. Yes, shoot them only in the appropriate circumstances, but shoot them.
That’s what it’s for.
My rifle is the same, but even more so. I absolutely want to hunt a deer with it. I even have a silencer that I can attach to it so I can be a little more respectful of those around me. But that’s really not what I own an AR for. I own it in case I need to shoot someone.
Or several someones.
Its primary purpose is to shoot people. Not paper, not deer, and not those annoying coyotes who live on my friend’s property. The reason I own it is to shoot people who need to get shot.
So, for the purpose of this discussion, let’s assume that the gun grabbers are correct and my AR is solely for killing people. So what? You know that in certain circumstances it’s totally legal to kill another person, right? It’s even considered by most people to be a socially responsible thing to do. If someone kicks in my door at night with the intention of robbing, raping, or murdering me and my family, pretty much everyone agrees that putting a few bullets in him is not only legal, but moral, and ethical as well.
“BUT YOU DON’T NEED AN AR-15 TO DO THAT!!!”
Why not? Who are you to tell me that I can’t or even shouldn’t do exactly that? What’s the difference to you if I shoot a home invader to death with a shotgun or with an AR? Dead is dead.
“BUT AR’s ARE ONLY FOR KILLING LOTS OF PEOPLE!!!”
So what? What if I need to kill a lot of people?
This is usually their back up argument. First ARs are only good for killing. Then they’re only good for killing LOTS OF PEOPLE!
Again, so what? Let me philosophize with you a bit.
How many grains of sand constitute a beach? How many grains of sand do I have to pile up in one place before you are willing to call it a beach and not just a pile of sand next to some water?
One grain? Surely not.
Two grains? Still no.
Ten million grains?
At what point does a pile of sand next to water become a beach?
Same thing goes for self defense. When the gun grabbers fall back from “It’s for killing!” to “It’s for killing LOTS of people really fast!” they’re trying to make the argument that maybe it’s ok for you to kill one person who is trying to murder you, and maybe two… or three at the outside. But not TEN!
Why not? Is there some tipping point where the criminals have gathered enough people together who want to kill you that you’re outvoted? If the vote is three to one you’re allowed to fight back, but at ten to one you’re supposed to lay down and die like a good little subject?
No. I don’t care if you line up the entire population of Newark, New Jersey outside my house. If they try to take me, I’m legally, morally, and ethically permitted to keep shooting until every one of them is dead, running away, or otherwise unable to continue harming me.
The gun grabbers, however, are terrified of having this conversation. This conversation exposes them for what they really are. They aren’t anti-gun. They’re anti-self-defense. They don’t believe that you should be permitted to use deadly force for any reason. You’re not a government agent, sprinkled with the pixie dust that imbues cops and soldiers with the authority to kill. You’re just some peon whose life belongs to the State.
So the next time you’re given some BS line by the gun grabbers, ask them a simple question.
“Is it ever legal, moral, or ethical for me, a non-police officer, not military civilian, to kill another human being?”
If they’re honest they will say “no.” If they’re mealy mouthed about it, make them describe in detail when they believe you are permitted to kill another person. I’m betting you’ll get some convoluted explanation that basically means “never.” But if you get a “yes,” along with conditions that seem reasonable, ask them one more simple question.
“If it’s legal, moral, and ethical for me to kill another human, why do you care if I do it with an AR-15 rather than a 12 gauge?”