OK
. . . People need the right to defend themselves against the lawless,
who could care less if gun laws are stricter. Police departments are
being cut, not expanded, so the need is greater than ever.
But come on
-- assault rifles? Extended clips? No background checks on both criminal
and mental health status? There can be a logical, safer middle ground
here.
That said, gun control legislation appears powerless to stop madness. In Connecticut, with some of the nation's toughest gun control laws, the Newtown mass murderer still was able to arm himself -- despite being turned down after a background check when he tried to buy a rifle a few days before the school shootings.
He did this by killing his mother and stealing the arsenal he used.
About the same time he murdered 20 children, six adults and then killed himself, a man in China slashed 22 children with a knife.
So, mandatory background checks ruling out both criminals and the mentally ill from gun ownership. But sane, at risk citizens still need the right to be armed in self-defense against those who would rape, rob and kill.
They do not, however, need a military assault rifle to do this.
If someone breaks into your home, you have a few seconds to react. That's one, two or maybe three shots from a revolver, normal semi-automatic pistol, or a shotgun.
Military grade assault rifles are more the firearm of terrorists or militia types with dreams of revolution or anarchy.
