A Short and Brief History of Gun Control Laws in America - At least In My Lifetime

I was born during the second term of President Eisenhower so I euphemistically refer to myself as a remnant of the 50's.  My childhood was during that tumultuous period we call the 60's and I reached a reasonable degree of maturity in the idealistic 70's.  I've completed enough orbits of old Solaris Prime to see Mark Twain's maxim about the repetition and rhyming of history come to past several times over.

When I explain to younger folks about the "course of Human Events," I point out to them that fads and common notions are a lot like the tire stem on the wheel of an automobile.  If we focus only on the wheel spinning on its hub, the stem will appear to start at the 12 o'clock position and circle all they way around till it appears to be at the same position again.  If we open our eyes to the bigger picture we will notice that the stem, the tire, and the entire car are several feet farther down the road and no longer occupy the same point in space and time as they did before.  In other words, "what goes around, comes around...again and again," and the same is true for the notion of more gun control laws.

The first calls for the restraints on the ownership of certain firearms I can remember was the attempt to ban "Saturday Night Specials" - inexpensive and easily concealable handguns.  When the first arguments came out that these weapons should be banned because "decent people" wouldn't own or use these cheap guns, the counter argument arose that such laws would be discriminatory against the poor and could be interpreted as racist against minorities.  In the name of equality, it was proposed that all handguns should be banned to prevent the "spread of violence."  Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed when studies showed that those places with the most restrictive bans on such weapons had the highest violent crime rates.

The next one that comes to mind is the calls for the outlawing of "Armor-piercing ammunition," or more commonly and sensationally referred to as "Cop-killer bullets."  There is the Kinetic or "K" bullet that when loaded into a handgun cartridge is capable of penetrating most levels of soft body armor worn by police officers but our benevolent government officials didn't want to stop there.  They wanted to ban any round of ammunition that could penetrate Level I soft body armor (manufacturers of body armor no longer produce this level because it was considered useless for police work).  Many sportsmen were in favor of the ban until they realized this included handgun ammunition that had "Magnum" or "+P" in its name and each and every rifle cartridge, including the venerable .30-30 Winchester deer hunting round.  When the truth got out this one, too, fell to the wayside though many states, including Texas, outlawed the Kinetic Bullet.

Another one was the call to ban "High-powered, Long-range Sniper Rifles."  "We don't need people owning guns that can stop a tank," was the cry.  Now there are special military units that use sniper rifles designed to fire the .50 BMG cartridge which was developed to defeat armored vehicles - during World War I - and Americans have had access to these very expensive rifles in semi-automatic only and bolt-action mode for some time.  One problem for those who wanted to ban them is that there is no record of any crimes being committed by someone using one of these weapons.  Their second problem was again the truth.  The definition they applied to the weapons they wanted to ban included many popular hunting rifles like the Remington 700, the Winchester 70, and the Ruger 77.  This didn't sit well with the American people so our benevolent government officials settled for export restrictions on these rifles and the scopes that most hunters mount on them.

In the late 80's the first call for a ban on "Assault Weapons" began after a school shooting in Stockton, California.  Even "Babs" was in favor of a ban on these semi-automatic rifles.  I've already written ad infinitum, ad nauseum, and etcetera on this subject before so let me just make one more point on something I wrote earlier.  Even though outlawing and barring the people from owning, carrying, and using firearms is clearly un-Constitutional and objective analysis of crime statistics provide no justification for their actions, why do these Gun Control Freaks continue to incrementally pass these laws?  I think I can find the answer in the words of the Nazarene Prophet:

"Or again, how can anyone enter a strong man's house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up  (disarms) the strong man?   Then he can rob his house." - Matthew 12:29 NIV

Modern firearms, as is said of Samuel Colt's invention, are indeed the great equalizer amongst humanity.  It equalizes the strength of the small man to the larger, of women to men, and of men and women to lions, tigers, and bears (Oh,my!).  With everyone equally armed and prepared to protect themselves then the amount of aggression in a society must go down out of fear of what one, with or without help, can do to stop and retaliate against the one who initiates violence upon others.  But as the Prophet has said, if a man can be brought lower in his defensive capability to another then he is an easier target to conquer and steal from.

When these GCF's call for the outlawing and banning of firearms they never include themselves and the heavily armed minions that serve them.  They intend for the people to be brought lower in their defensive capablilities, individually and in the collective, so as to make them easier victims for the robbery they intend to commit.  If you choose to be defenseless, then that is your choice and may you live and long and prosper.  As for me and my house, we choose to remain strong and live as equals amongst our fellow humans...