Up until now I’ve tried to keep the topic of firearms out of this blog. I’ve never really felt it was applicable to having a 72 Hour Bag. I don’t think there will be an apocalypse suddenly calling for the need to arm yourself like in the movie The Road or The Road Warrior… It just ain’t going to happen. And during an earthquake or in the aftermath of a disaster those first 72 hours typically have shown one of unity, so I remain completely impartial on how any individual feels about packing a gun in their 72 Hour Bag.
The Orlando shooting has prompted the gun control issue to the fore front of the national debate. Because of my experiences during the weeks after Hurricane Katrina it became abundantly clear that there were people who owned guns and gained power and those who didn’t. I never owned a gun till I moved back to Los Angeles and looked critically at my surroundings, we live in a disaster prone area – and here too there will be a power vacuum when disaster strikes. After I made the choice to purchase a gun, I told myself that if I were to own a gun, I wanted to become very proficient with it, like obsessively good. I sought out training, and probably because of the line of work I am in I had access to people who used weapons in the most hostile situations and several of the people I worked with were some of the most elite warriors of their time allowing me to gain insight into how a highly proficient shooter operates. I practiced and I practiced on my own and taking classes – classes that were typically not available to civilians. I learned quickly that going to the range with 1,000 rounds of ammunition for one single day of shooting was just barely scratching the surface to become proficient. When I hear of someone caught with 1,000 rounds of ammo I generally laugh for two reasons. One, I have friends who typically drive around with close to 10,000 rounds and two, the same people who scream in horror at the though of a person having 1,000 rounds are the same who feel you should have to pass a marksmanship test to own a fire arm. What do you think you just pick a weapon up and can actually hit the side of a barn. I can tell you, it ain’t that easy.
For those of you who have never purchased a gun or shot a gun I can tell you this: this myth that you can walk into a Walmart and walk out with a gun is ridiculous – at least here in California. The are background checks, there is finger printing, there is a test. Every time I purchase ammunition I am finger printed. Period. If you peer into the looking glass you will see just how difficult it is to acquire a weapon legally. With every law the legislators create they make it more difficult for legal owners to purchase and it does nothing to prevent criminals from owning a gun. I have been critical of the NRA not stepping up and helping solve the problem of criminals getting guns, as well as figuring how to stop a psychopath from gaining possession of any weapon. The need to become more proactive in solving those two issues.
Today there are four pieces of legislation going up, I have no issue with any of them. You can read about them here. They propose the following:
1. Tighten the background check system. (Republican lead)- Great, go for it.
2.Expand Background checks. (Democrat lead) – Great, sounds like the same thing but what ever.
3. Prevent terrorist from buying guns. (Republican version) – WTF? Are you serious, sounds like a no brainer.
4. Prevent Suspected Terrorists from buying guns. (Democratic version) – Same as above. Just do it.
Here’s the problem with most gun legislation that bans a specific type of weapon. Most legislators couldn’t tell the difference from a AR15 to a magazine or a clip. A friend of mine who was law enforcement in Los Angeles said that when trying to prevent gang shootings in South Central during the 80’s the legislators reacted by banning the Uzi. Those weapons had unarguably caused some high profile shootings but my friend argued that if they really wanted to prevent a large number of homicides they would have banned the Saturday Night Special. He claimed the Saturday Night Special was the gun of choice during that era and more homicides had been committed by that weapon than the Uzi. I know what you are going to say, but the Uzi is an automatic weapon and can spray bullets killing a greater number of victims. Here’s the rub. There is already a law on the books banning that weapon, the National Firearms Act of 1934. Automatic weapons are illegal and have been since 1934, the sale or purchase of any weapon must be regulated by a person with a Federal Firearms License. So getting back to banning specific weapons, a friend recently said there is no reason for a person to own a weapon such as the AR15 (which wasn’t the weapon used in Orlando), it’s only purpose is for killing people. Well I say that is it’s only purpose if that’s what you do with it. But mine is locked up in my safe and I like shooting at paper targets with mine, so I guess there’s one other use. Or perhaps if you go hunting with it, that could be another use. And if you don’t think it’s a good weapon to hunt with, why is it called a Varmint Gun? Just watch an episode of Life Below Zero and you’ll see there is another use for that weapon. Why use it for hunting? Well it’s pretty darn accurate and really reliable.
Listen, evil people do evil things, and they will always find a way to do harm to their fellow man. I’m not saying there aren’t crimes committed with a gun, but there are a lot of crimes committed with a knife. Point being mere hours after the Orlando shooting 29 people were killed by attackers in a subway in China with knives. We had a saying when training with knives – if a person has a gun, take it away. If a person has a knife, run. The knife is far deadlier than the gun. A gun takes skill to use, a knife doesn’t. In the United Kingdom they banned possession of all handguns. And now? You guessed it, they have one of the highest incidences of knife attacks in the world (probably second to the Philippines) and as a result? They are discussing the possibility of outlawing knives over a certain length. This highlights one of the issues with people who know nothing about what they are legislating. The large knife looks really scary, but in fact a small blade is far deadlier. With a large blade you gain distance, good in a knife against knife fight, but a small blade gives you stealth and it makes it all the more difficult to take away from the attacker.
So I say instead of legislating against an object figure out a way to change behaviors, Canada has more weapons per capita than the US, but has a far lower homicide rate… Why? Answer that question and we might get some where.
Enough of my rambling, here are some infographics I fin applicable to the conversation, especially the one on Kennesaw GA.