You will not take my firearms away

Dear Editor:

In regards to the letter Gerald Schmiedicke wrote on Feb. 8th 2012
It would seem Mr. Schmiedicke shares the same view as a small handful of Americans. The notion that only the government should possess firearms, and the citizens should be left unarmed for the common good and safety of the populace. Worked out great for citizens under Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, or what Mexico imposes now. The idea that a few “wackos” should for some reason strip the rights of every other citizen in this country could be applied to every inanimate object we use. Knives, vehicles, and ball bats have all be successful in murdering people. The feared Genghis Khan used horses, bow and arrow, and swords. Statistically, knives and vehicles kill many many more people than what are referred to as “assault weapons” when you look at the FBI crime statistics over the years. So by that logic, we should ban knives and vehicles. Or should we instead only allow butter knives, and vehicles governed down to only allow a slow rate of speed so as people do not die from others mistakes while behind the wheel?
The very term assault weapon is a made up term coined by the anti-gun movement and media. Military style assault weapons as well. The military uses most commonly the M4 Carbine and the M16 Rifle. These weapons are capable of firing in 2 modes. Semi-automatic and burst fire. Burst fire being 3 rounds are expelled for every pull of the trigger. These weapons are not allowed to be purchased by civilians today, however they can purchase a rifle that looks like it, but does not act the same way mechanically, as they only fire in semi auto, much like the Remington semi auto 30.06 Grandpa hunted with, which by the way had a much larger round, which makes me laugh when those in the media call the AR15 .223 rifle a high powered rifle.
But lets dive into the past. Actual machine guns were available for purchase by your every day Joe. You could walk into a hardware store, buy a hammer, nails, and a machine gun. I would challenge anyone to comb over the crime statistics back then and find mass murders that were done outside gangsters killing each other in the streets at the height of the mob wars. As a matter of fact, times then were much different.
The AR15 rifle was marketed as a sporting rifle before it was ever a military rifle. It was adopted by the military later, and made to allow full automatic fire. They named it the M16 Rifle. (A1) I use a newer version of the AR15 rifle that allows me to customize the rifle to whatever I am hunting. Yes, I do hunt with mine, and have downed a good number of white tail deer and russian boars. It is more modular, and offers a wide range of after market parts to better suit the individual shooter/hunter. Full industries have sprung up and prospered because of this rifle. It can be chambered in .22LR all the way up to a 300 Black Out. This allows the hunter to pick a round, make quick changes without buying another complete weapon, and complete the task at hand be it a ground hog, or an elk.
But lets get back to statistics and real logic. The FBI crime statistics show that we are actually safer in America than we are in many other countries when you look at all the data. Per 100,000 citizens, our violent crime rate is down compared to Great Britain and Australia which took gun rights away from citizens in the hopes to curb violence. What they did was see a sharp increase in violent crimes. Home invasion up 300% right off the bat. Criminals now know the home owner has no chance to defend themselves. If a woman is in a house with her children, how is it she is to defend herself when the police are 10 or 15 minutes away, and 3 thugs break down her door? Should she break out the super secret ninja powers and take them down? Or point the muzzle of a shotgun or AR15 at the would be rapists or robbers? Funny is the fact that people who advocate gun control will call the police first thing when someone breaks into the home and hope like hell they get there fast with some guns.
No current or future laws should ever strip the right of a U.S. citizen granted to them by the Constitution to defend themselves properly. I have read the supporting documents our founders crafted such as the federalist papers and letters between, or left for us to browse. It is more than clear that the 2nd Amendment was put in place not only for self defense from would be robbers, etc., but also from a tyrannical government or future invasion force. Hunting is not mentioned as a reason. Of course hunting may have been hidden in there right next to the word musket. But a musket back then was in fact military grade weaponry. Go figure.
Lets be honest here, and actually apply logic. Most law enforcement officers are against more bans on weapons, and many urge citizens to keep defensive arms at the house. After all, they should know best seems how they are there to see the end of so many crimes, and know they can’t show up at your house quick enough if a threat presents its self. I have personally had to brandish my carry pistol twice. Both out of town, once in Detroit, and once in Cincinnati. I am lucky I had that ability because in both cases, I could have been seriously injured or killed. You will not take my firearms away!
Eric Isaac
Clare, MI