Where in the name of common sense are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow-citizens? What shadow of danger can there be from men who are daily mingling with the rest of their countrymen and who participate with them in the same feelings, sentiments, habits, and interests?
We should not fear arms in the hands of our fellow citizens. Indeed, experience across the world has taught us that when good people are unarmed, criminals flourish. Laws are no deterrent to the lawless. Do we all wish a peaceful society? Of course we do. Ensuring that end requires a citizenry able to defend itself.
I have given careful thought to the security of my family. As a result, I am seldom unarmed when I am in public, and never unarmed at home. I don't do this out of paranoia, but based on the knowledge that in the unlikely event that I am ever in a deadly force situation, the consequences of being unarmed are too high.
As part of my decision making process, I thought very carefully about what self-defense strategy would work the best under my circumstances. As a result, I've chosen a semi-automatic .223 caliber carbine based on the AR platform as my primary means of home defense. This rifle would be banned as an "assault weapon" were a new AWB imposed.
"Assault weapons" are often characterized in the press as "high-powered assault weapons", but anyone familiar with the history of such weapons knows that they actually represent a significant reduction in power over the previous generation of military arms. The AK platforms exhibit a similar reduction over their antecedents. What does this mean in practical terms for a home-defense weapon? For me, the major reason to choose the .223 platform is a reduced tendency to penetrate residential wall construction. The small projectile, moving very fast, has a tendency to shatter when penetrating wallboard, and in fact, is less likely to do so intact than the projectile from a 9mm handgun. At the same time, the AR is a lightweight, easily controllable system with minimal recoil, making it well suited to use by people of smaller stature than, for instance, a 12 ga. shotgun would be. Put simply, I can be assured that my wife can handle the weapon if she needs to and don't have to worry much about a projectile leaving the envelope of my house with enough energy to do harm. In a residential neighborhood, you can't ask for much more.
I could go on to discuss the differences between the cosmetic features an "assault weapons" ban would address and actual military assault weapons, but since actual military assault weapons have been illegal without a federal license since the National Firearms Act of 1934, I won't. Furthermore, ownership and transfer of them is restricted to those manufactured and licensed prior to 1986. So, if true assault weapons are already banned, why enact new law? Why, indeed.
No comments:
Post a Comment