Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

Al Jazeera tells hunters not to fight for gun rights

From the above mentioned attempts to define "armor-piercing" ammunition in such a way as to net all centerfire rifle ammunition, to the Violence Policy Center's efforts to have accurate bolt-action rifles banned as "sniper rifles," to the International Action Network on Small Arms' (IANSA) call for a ban of all rifles that can kill at 100 meters (all rifles, in other words), hunting guns may be toward the end of the list of gun ban zealots' ambitions, but they are on it, and if we gun rights advocates have been taken out of the picture, who will speak for you, hunters?. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend--and Facebook "likes" and "shares" are hugely appreciated.

1 comments:

Anonymous said...

I don't know how common the "Fudds" really are; most gun owners (and advocates of freedom in general, whether they choose to own guns or not) are smart enough to recognize the "assault weapon" hysteria for what it is: divide-and-conquer.

Also, most gun owners realize that it's unrealistic to make distinctions between "good" and "evil" weapons. Dead is dead, whether you are shot by a maniac on a shooting spree with an AK-47, or by a mugger with a five-shot .38 revolver. Or blown up by terrorists with an IED made with a pressure cooker. Or, for that matter, run over by a reckless driver.

And most of us realize that the distinctions are just to allow the anti-gun (actually, anti-freedom) activists to look moderate and reasonable. And it really is a slippery slope. Their definition of "assault weapon" is so broad and vague that it can include anything they want to ban, from an AR-15 to a single-shot antique musket.

You sometimes see comments on blogs, or letters in newspaper op-ed pages, saying things like, "I'm a gun owner and hunter but I support banning assault rifles and semi-automatic guns." But a lot of those commenters are just anti-gun trolls, and their comments are intended to make it appear that people who own guns for non-sporting purposes (i.e., self-defense) are a lunatic fringe.