Connect with us

Guns and Crime

Seven things that should be banned before ‘assault weapons’



Seven things that should be banned before assault weapons

Yesterday, the first Republican signed onto an “assault weapons” ban. Pete King, New York’s RINO Congressman, spoke out against the weapons that were used in recent mass shootings in Gilroy, El Paso, and Dayton.

“They are weapons of mass slaughter,” King said. “I don’t see any need for them in everyday society.”

Let’s get one thing out of the way before continuing. It doesn’t matter whether Pete King or anyone else sees a need for particular firearms in everyday society. That’s not their call. He was elected with the sole purpose of defending the Constitution, and that includes the 2nd Amendment. But even if pretend his actions are not betrayals to his oath of office, he’s ignoring the very thing leftists love to ignore: The 2nd Amendment is the people’s protection against a tyrannical government, whether foreign or domestic. Those who believe our government could never turn tyrannical are buying into the same con job the people of Venezuela believed in when their government was playing nice and taking guns.

One can argue that if it weren’t for the 2nd Amendment, this nation would have already fallen to the hands of oppression from Washington DC or elsewhere.

With that understood, let’s be empathetic conservatives and see things from the left’s perspective for a moment. They’re scared because bad people use AR-15s and other “assault weapons” to commit mass shootings. This fear is driving the calls for banning them. People fear death. It’s understandable. But less than 1% of 1% of AR-15s in America are used to commit crimes. This means 99.99% of AR-15 owners are law abiding or at least aren’t using their firearms in their crimes. It also means millions will have their right to defend themselves against tyranny or crime hampered tremendously. Furthermore, those of us who are not “assault weapons” owners will be less safe; the presence of such firearms is often what keeps bad elements at bay, even if they’re not directly in our hands.

But since we’re trying to see things from the left’s perspective, let’s assume they feel the need to be protected from the evils of “assault rifles” and in our post-truth society, their feelings supersede our facts. Fine. Then in such a world, we must be cognizant of the various other things that are actually much more dangerous than “assault rifles.” If people need to be protected from those, then there are many other things that need to be banned as well. After all, a lung cancer death is just as heartbreaking as a gunshot death. Dead is dead. If we’re trying to prevent unnecessary death, then let’s start banning the things that kill us unnecessarily.

It took three minutes to compile this list of seven things in a quick brainstorming session with my nephew. He’s 12. I’m sure if we put more time into it we could have come up with dozens more.


The obvious place to start the list is with something that more people oppose than firearms. The consensus among scientists is that smoking is bad for your health and will eventually kill you. This is, of course, common sense. So why are they still legal? Shouldn’t they have been banned the moment we learned they’re the primary cause of multiple top killers in the health arena like lung cancer and heart disease?

One can argue that since they kill slowly, they’re not as evil. But my mother, who died earlier this month from lunch cancer, would have argued her suffering at the end of her life was harder than dying quickly.


If you want to only ban “quick” killers, then let’s ban doctors. Medical malpractice results in a quarter-million unnecessary deaths in America each year, and many of these deaths happen suddenly. Those dastardly deviants with their medical degrees use ultra-sharp scalpels and heart-stopping drugs almost every day! How can they be allowed to continue their reign of terror?

Oh, but doctors usually save lives. Fine. We’ll give them a pass for now, but we have our collectivist eyes on them. But there are things that don’t save lives that are extremely deadly…


For every person who dies from a rifle shot – whether it’s considered by the leftist elite to be an “assault rifle” or not – there are 100 people who are killed by knives or other sharp objects like swords, machetes, battle axes (though statistics are slim on actual battle axe deaths), spears, scalpels (strike that, those are normally used by doctors and we already gave them a pass), and box cutters. Assault knives are a much more prolific weapon of choice than “assault weapons” when one wants someone else dead.

The argument against banning knives is that we need them for cooking. Perhaps it’s time to only allow trained cooking professionals to have them, properly licensed, of course. We should also consider laws that all knives need to be kept in knife safes.

Unhealthy Foods

Speaking of foods, how in the world is McDonald’s still in business in 21st century America? It’s… appalling. Heart disease is the nation’s leading cause of death, and fast food has to play a major role in this with their saturated fats and nutrient-challenged offerings of sustenance.

Naysayers may complain that nobody’s forcing anyone else to eat unhealthy foods. It’s a choice and therefore shouldn’t be banned. So if the criteria is choice, there’s a killer in many of our backyards that imposes its own will on others…


Death is not the only problem with mass shootings. People are often injured by them as well. In fact, there are normally many more mass shooting survivors who are injured but not killed. The same can be said about dogs. These potentially vicious creatures are running amok through the streets seeking a human (or cat) to devour. The death toll may be low, but with around 4.5 million dog bites reported each year and 6,000-13,000 serious enough for hospitalization (where the victims then have to contend with the aforementioned dangers of doctors), we can’t overlook our canine “friends.”

But they’re not people. PETA will have a problem if we start targeting animals. We need to keep this list focused on people. And some of the most deadly people in the world aren’t hiding in the shadows committing their acts of violence. They’re not only doing it in public. Many of them are actually getting paid for it.


If you watch American television, you’ve likely come across the grizzly actions performed by athletes. Boxers, hockey players, football players, mixed martial artists… the harm they do is unfathomable. And don’t get me started on why no criminal charges are filed whenever someone charges the mound and starts a bench-clearing brawl. These ruffians are a menace to society and we’re giving our hard-earned dollars to their owners (wait, we’re not supposed to say that anymore) so we can actually WATCH this violence taking place.

But it’s not just adults. Children are exploited constantly, forced to “play” games that lead to 3.5 MILLION injuries per year. Sorry folks, but this is unacceptable.

And lastly, speaking of children…


Somewhere around 50,000,000 Americans have been killed by abortion since Roe v. Wade. Full stop.

Obviously, this satirical look at the dangers of this world is not really calling for a ban on dogs, guns, or anything else.

Emotions are the singular driving force behind calls for “assault weapons” bans. The statistics don’t support them. Common sense doesn’t support them. The Constitution doesn’t support them. If we are being rational, gun bans should be taken off the table.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement



Guns and Crime

There are two beneficiaries to gun control, and you are I aren’t among them



There are two beneficiaries to gun control and you are I arent among them

Gun control is all over the news as just about every Democrat and a growing number of Republican lawmakers are leaning towards some action that will “do something” about mass shootings in America. It’s so clearly an emotion-driven issue, as can be seen by the simple fact that gun control doesn’t work to stop gun violence. But just because gun control doesn’t make us safer doesn’t mean there aren’t people who will benefit from it once enacted.

The first is obvious. Criminals are clear beneficiaries of gun control because they have no intention of abiding by it. Their victims and potential victims, on the other had, are likely going to be compelled to undergo background checks, sign up for gun registries, or have their firearms confiscated in some “buyback” program. Gun control is the best news criminals have had since criminal justice reform.

The second is debatable, not because it isn’t unambiguously true but because these particular beneficiaries pretend they aren’t gaining from it. This is, of course, a lie. Politicians gain greatly from gun control. Not all of them do because not all of them are anti-American radical progressives who envision a nation that bows to socialism and the authoritarian control over our lives by a nanny state. But even those who are not radical progressives get the benefit of applause from the masses who have been indoctrinated into he belief guns are the problem, not criminals or the mentally ill.

When gun control comes around, and it almost certainly will, many Americans will cheer. This will be the same type of enthusiasm many happy sheep experience when they’re being taken to a brand new location. They never know until it’s too late they’re being led to the slaughter. Criminals will be cheering as their victims will be disarmed by laws that criminals, by their nature of living a life of crime, have no intention of obeying. Leftist politicians will cheer because they’ll be one step closer to the oppression they have planned through their socialist ideology.

Republican lawmakers who support gun control will cheer for a while until they realize the enthusiasm they once had from their base evaporated as quickly as our 2nd Amendment rights did when they decided to back gun control. By the time they try to spin it as a necessary evil or whatever other excuse they try to make, it will be too late for them. We will have already moved on to vote for lawmakers who are not willing to break their oath to defend the Constitution.

Criminals love gun control. Authoritarian politicians do, too. If you’re not a gun-toting felon or Marxist politician, then you will not benefit at all from gun control. In fact, its enactment in any form will make you less safe even if you don’t own a gun.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

The 2nd Amendment is a reminder to government of a right we inherently have



The 2nd Amendment is a reminder to government of a right we inherently have

I’ll keep this brief. The 2nd Amendment is often mischaracterized by both the left and even its defenders on the right. To state it simply, our right to keep and bear arms is a natural right, one that is granted to everyone by powers higher than man.

Read it carefully: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Many misconstrue this as the founders giving us the right to bear arms by codifying it in the Bill of Rights. But in reality, this amendment was not intended to grant a right to anyone. It is simply a reminder of the existence of the right, an explanation of why this right is so important to the nation, and a decree that the right itself is above reproach from government.

Everybody is born with the right to defend themselves from tyranny whether that tyranny comes from our neighbors (criminals) or from oppressive forces domestic or foreign. In many countries, the government takes that right away. In America, we can forgo this right with our actions. Sometimes, it’s voluntary – nobody is forced to own or carry a firearm. Other times, it’s mandatory – the actions of criminals is used as a declaration that they willfully gave up their right keep and bear arms through their actions.

As for the rest of us, this right is absolute and unambiguous. Unless we use our firearms to commit crimes, government does not have the legal power to prevent us from keeping or bearing them.

We can get into the practical application of this principle at another time, but the principle behind the 2nd Amendment must be understood in order for any debates to move forward properly. Otherwise, one or both sides will be operating on a false premise.

Law-abiding gun owners are the true targets of all forms of gun control. We know this because the proposed measures will adversely affect us while doing nothing to stop violent criminals. Yes, the 2nd Amendment is under attack from our own government.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

California’s touted background checks yielded ZERO impact on gun deaths



Californias touted background checks yield ZERO impact on gun deaths

As California goes, so too does the progressive side of the nation. California is where radical ideas are tried out and, in the vast majority of cases, fail miserably. Undeterred, progressives tend to look at these failures as successes waiting to happen eventually, so they beat the drum for whatever leftist legislation the state is able to pass. Such is the case with universal background checks which are now being pushed nationwide after California’s “groundbreaking” attempt to make them work.

They didn’t work. In fact, they can be chalked up as being a monumental failure to anyone who is honest. Sadly, the radical progressives of the Democrats Party are not honest, which is why they keep pushing these background checks as if they demonstrated some measure of success.

Many patriots already knew this. The non-partisan study into the effectiveness of background checks in reducing gun deaths told us late last year that they didn’t work. But that study has been suppressed, ignored, or “debunked” by leftists with a gun control agenda. They refuse to allow facts to get in the way of their agenda.

So, we’ll revisit it…

Johns Hopkins Study: California’s Background Check Law Had No Impact on Gun Deaths – Foundation for Economic Education joint study conducted by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the University of California at Davis Violence Prevention Research Program found that California’s much-touted mandated background checks had no impact on gun deaths, and researchers are puzzled as to why.

In 1991, California simultaneously imposed comprehensive background checks for firearm sales and prohibited gun sales (and gun possession) to people convicted of misdemeanor violent crimes. The legislation mandated that all gun sales, including private transactions, would have to go through a California-licensed Federal Firearms License (FFL) dealer. Shotguns and rifles, like handguns, became subject to a 15-day waiting period to make certain all gun purchasers had undergone a thorough background check.

It was the most expansive state gun control legislation in America, affecting an estimated one million gun buyers in the first year alone. Though costly and cumbersome, politicians and law enforcement agreed the law was worth it.

The legislation would “keep more guns out of the hands of the people who shouldn’t have them,” said then-Republican Gov. George Deukmejian.

“I think the new laws are going to help counter the violence,” said LAPD spokesman William D. Booth.

More than a quarter of a century later, researchers at Johns Hopkins and UC Davis dug into the results of the sweeping legislation. Researchers compared yearly gun suicide and homicide rates over the 10 years following implementation of California’s law with 32 control states that did not have such laws.

They found “no change in the rates of either cause of death from firearms through 2000.”

Take note that researchers were “puzzled.” It’s as if they did the study expecting it to yield tremendous results through which they could tout gun control. These American universities are not the NRA. They weren’t commissioned to prove gun control in general or universal background checks in particular are ineffective. They wanted gun control to be proven effective, and when the data didn’t support that premise, they were puzzled.

Here’s the reality: Gun control adversely affects law abiding citizens while criminals, who are wont to break such laws, are not affected. If anything, gun control measures aid in the rise of crime, as we’ve seen in Chicago and other cities with obtuse gun control measures already in place.

The 2nd Amendment defends an armed citizenry because our ability to protect ourselves from oppression is the cornerstone of what America represents. Whether against criminals or tyranny, the 2nd Amendment empowers Americans to stay safe and strong.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading