Gun Control Debate Ignores The Real Issues While Pushing To Restrict Rights Of Law-Abiding Citizens

In the wake of the Orlando shootings, where 49 innocent people were murdered and another 53 were wounded, the gun control debate has once again taken center stage in America. Although I can’t speak for all the law-abiding citizens in America who own firearms, as a veteran, I do not see why it is necessary to restrict the rights of millions of Americans who didn’t break the law and do not deserve to be penalized for murdering innocent people in what essentially was an act of terror.

The Dodge Globe reported that the Second Amendment isn’t up for debate. When the Constitution was written by the Founding Fathers, it included the Second Amendment. The American Revolution was still fresh in their minds, and they knew what it would mean if average Americans were left defenseless. It is true that they included a clause in the amendment for a well-regulated militia. Militias were controlled by the states, and there was no provision in the Constitution for the federal government to regulate the militia.

Although it is true that no one hunts with an AR-15, firearms aren’t just used for hunting and sports in the United States. The Founding Fathers didn’t have hunting and sports in mind when they wrote the Second Amendment. Those in the gun control debate who claim that AR-15s should be banned because they can’t be using for hunting ignore one simple fact: The Second Amendment was meant to protect the American people against any person who had an army and wanted to take the rights of the American people under the Constitution. It was about personal defense at both the individual and community level.

Slate reported that Hillary Clinton’s solution to the gun control debate is to tie gun control and the terrorist watch list together. Omar Mateen, the shooter in Orlando, was put on the list maintained by the FBI, but he was later removed. One of the things the Democrats in Congress want to do is prevent those on the terrorist watch list from being able to purchase firearms. That won’t work either, especially if the person has been previously removed from the list.

Breitbart reported that those in the gun control debate who push additional gun control restrictions on law-abiding citizens are essentially labeling them terrorists and punishing them for the actions of a terrorist who murdered 50 people. Not only did Omar Mateen allegedly commit an act of terrorism when he murdered Americans in Orlando, he obeyed every law that the left had put into effect to protect Americans, laws that the left assured Americans would keep them safe.

Instead of admitting that gun control measures don’t work, everyone from President Obama to Hillary Clinton, Homeland Secretary Jeh Johnson, and the limousine liberals like Conan O’Brien and Seth McFarlane are calling for additional restrictions on the average American whether it’s the farmer in Iowa or an oilman in Texas.

Approximately four million Americans own an AR-15, the civilian version of the military’s M-16. Calling for restricting a rifle that doesn’t even meet the legal definition of an assault rifle not only shows the ignorance of those in the gun control debate who do it, it places unnecessary restrictions on law-abiding citizens who are innocent of the crimes of the Orlando gunman. Any gun control legislation that is created needs to be based on facts and logic and preventing those who should not have firearms from having them while allowing law-abiding Americans to keep their rights under the Constitution.

[Image via Wikimedia Commons]

Share this article: Gun Control Debate Ignores The Real Issues While Pushing To Restrict Rights Of Law-Abiding Citizens
More from Inquisitr