Abusing Amendment I to attack Amendment II

by Tim Inwood

On September 18th I was concerned Sarah Brady had briefly taken control of my local newspaper, considering the editorial cartoon and AP article that looked and sounded like propaganda straight from the Brady Campaign, an organization that never misses an opportunity to attack our Second Amendment rights.

The article quoting rabid anti-gun politicians like Obama, Feinstein and anti-gun activists like Kristen Rand, gratuitously taking a swing at the AR-15 rifle, basically blamed gun owners and the gun laws for the fact that Aaron Alexis was able to pass the required background check and legally purchase the shotgun he used to murder 12 citizens at the Navy Yard in Washington D.C. The argument made is unsound. The fact is had law enforcement, the various courts dealing with him and the U.S. Navy done their job, dealt with his various crimes and treatment for mental illness as they should have, he never would have been able to pass the background check to buy the gun.

The media was rabid about how he used an AR-15 and then visibly saddened when they realized he used a Remington 870, a popular and common shotgun. Their hysteria over the AR-15 however was not given up without some gnashing of teeth . CNN, not wanting to let the AR-15 loose from their clutches, handled it this way:

Federal law enforcement sources told CNN Tuesday that authorities have recovered three weapons from the scene of the mass shooting, including one -- a shotgun -- that investigators believe Alexis brought in to the compound. The other two weapons, which sources say were handguns, may have been taken from guards at the Navy complex.

The sources, who have detailed knowledge of the investigation, cautioned that initial information that an AR-15 was used in the shootings may have been incorrect. Regardless, the massacre pushed the AR-15 back in the gun-control debate.

What? Why?

Seriously, why does a gun that had no role in the event become part of the debate? Could they be any more transparent? It's because the scary image of the black gun is useful for pushing an anti-gun agenda to those who know little or nothing about guns.

Their clumsy handling of this would be funny if this were not how the press treats the subject. One of the tired cliches used by the press is the phrase "weapon of choice". Back in the 80s I heard this when they claimed in Maryland "the 'Saturday Night Special' (never mind no such gun exists) is the weapon of choice of criminals". They wound up banning some very expensive and fairly large handguns with that piece of idiotic legislation in that state. Then in 1989, fueling the import ban, it was "the AK47 is the weapon of choice of criminals". Clinton banned "Street Sweepers" and the "Striker 12" in the 90s because they were, according to him, the new weapon of choice for criminals.

These days the press loves to repeat the claim that the AR-15 is the weapon of choice... What rubbish. The phrase is much like when I hear a teenager frequently dropping the word "like" all over a sentence. In my view, it's a sign of a lack of intellectual ability to think. In the last several mass shootings rifles were used in less than a quarter of the events, unless you count the fact rifles like the AR-15 were used in every case by the good guys to stop the bad guy causing carnage.

"The weapon of choice" is an ever changing thing, but what it ALWAYS IS is the current gun the media are using to scare people who know little about guns. Don't be fooled by people who have to lie to push their agenda. The only way the term 'weapon of choice' applies to the AR-15 is that it is the overwhelming weapon of choice for U.S. law enforcement to arm policemen facing criminals and why should any good citizen of this country be denied this fine arm for the protection of their family?

Left out of the media discussion is the other culprit who certainly should take some blame for the high number of deaths - former President Bill Clinton. Clinton made it harder for military personnel to carry arms or ammo on military bases. The military exists to defend this country but we have made it harder for them to not only protect the country but their own military installations by disarming them; that’s ridiculous. More legally armed personnel could have stopped this carnage earlier.

Also blame the Democrats who changed the laws on how we handle the insane 40 years ago, and now allow the mentally ill to run loose among society. Authorities knew Laughner, Lanza and Alexis were crazy but nothing was done. Then they commit mass murder and the liberals blame guns and gun owners, forgetting why these lunatics who kill were on the streets.

There is plenty of blame to go around, but as usual the press misses the target and attacks the rights of the American people to keep and bear arms. That's the typical knee jerk reaction, but it's brain-dead and thoughtless.

Tim Inwood is the current Legislative Liaison and Past President of the Clinton County Farmers and Sportsmen Association, an Endowment Member of the NRA and Life Member of the OGCA, Republican Central Committeeman for Chester Township A, in Clinton County, Ohio, and a volunteer for Buckeye Firearms Association.

He is also currently running for the Board of Directors of the Ohio Gun Collector’s Association, the support of members in November will be appreciated.