A common argument that gun owners make is that arbitrary gun laws turn otherwise law-abiding citizens into criminals. Is it true?
Shaneen Allen Incident:
27-year-old Shaneen Allen, a phlebotomist living in Pennsylvania puts her two young children in the family car and drives to New Jersey. She makes an unsafe lane change while there, and is stopped by Police. She tells the officer that she has a valid concealed carry license and that her .380 Bersa handgun is in the vehicle. The officer advises Allen that NJ does not honor her PA concealed handgun license. In fact, she is in violation of a felony statute by transporting a loaded, concealed firearm. And the firearm had hollow-point bullets, another felony crime in New Jersey.
So, she is arrested and charged for her crime and faces a 3-year prison sentence without the possibility of parole. The prosecutor moves forward with the charges, and the judge denies her the ability to enter a diversionary program to avoid prison time. Only after a pardon by then Governor Chris Christie, does Allen have the weight of a felony prosecution lifted off her shoulders.
Why did Allen get a concealed handgun license and have the gun in the first place? The answer is simple … self-protection. See Allen is a single mother raising two children in a city with much crime. She purchased the firearm a week prior to this incident because she had been robbed and beaten twice that year. Seems reasonable right? By the way, Allen had no prior criminal history whatsoever, until that day.
That's just one, rare example, right?
Don't Fly in New York:
How about Colorado resident, 28-year-old Haley Leach. She visited New York state to do some hunting. She intended to fly back to Colorado after her trip. She checks into the NY airport and declares that she has a handgun locked in a box for transportation. Note this is the same handgun and process of declaration she made when traveling TO New York.
Poor Haley is arrested on scene for illegal possession of a firearm. Kudos, now she won't be able to carry out her plan to harm her fellow citizens.
How About one More Gem From the Big Apple:
A woman from North Carolina moves to Brooklyn, New York. She owns a .40 handgun, which she brought with her from North Carolina. One night, her ex-boyfriend kicks down her door and rushes into her home. Fearing for her life, she shoots the ex-boyfriend, stopping his attack and possibly saving her life. Even after investigating the shooting, the police find she acted within her rights in her claim of self-defense.
But she will be victimized again that night, this time by the police. She is arrested because she had not registered her handgun with the state of New York. Another citizen facing felony charges for illegally possessing a firearm.
When the Script is Flipped:
But what would happen if those pushing for more gun control laws, were in violation themselves?
It seems like every gun-control proponent is trying to one-up each other to display how virtuous they are. Your worth is directly tied to how many anti-gun mistruths you can regurgitate. The more hatred of gun owners you display, the more cool points you earn. The pathetic publicity stunts are only meant to make themselves feel better. They don't actually do anything productive. Well, I take that back …
Take Virginia Democratic Congressional candidate, Karen Mallard. She is so fed up with “gun violence” and people disobeying gun laws, that she simply can't take it anymore. She decides to post a video on Facebook of her idiotic ‘
common sense‘ solution to solving mass shootings. I am not joking, she actually has a foolproof plan.
She grabs an AR-15 that belongs to her husband and brings it out to the backyard. Like some paganistic sacrifice to the Anti-Gun gods, she vows to cut the gun up so it “can never be used to harm anyone.”
(on a side note, if Mrs. Mallard believed she wasn't responsible or stable enough to control the inanimate
evil death machine AR-15 in her home, out of fear that it would somehow possess her to commit a mass shooting, she could lock it in a safe, or sell it to a legal, responsible gun owner who doesn't go around killing people). I wonder how many criminals saw her video, jumped up and decided to cut up their guns and end their life of crime? Probably none, but I digress.
Mallard exposes her dogmatic beliefs, in a diatribe of anti-gun, misinformed talking points. She then takes a grinder to the barrel of the AR-15. As sparks fly and the barrel is cut in two, I can almost hear anti-gunners sobbing tears of joy.
Only one problem, she has just committed a felony for thousands to see.
See in addition to strict regulation of ‘machine-guns' or ‘fully-automatic' firearms, the ATF regulates SBR's (Short Barrel Rifles). Gun owners can't simply cut the barrel on their rifle to make it shorter. I know it makes it look less scary to the CNN news reporter, but you just can't do it. Well, you can, but it involves lots of paperwork, extensive background checks, a tax payment to the government and a long wait time. All of which I am guessing Mrs. Congressional Candidate failed to do.
These are laws that most gun owners know, but those claiming that it is easier to buy a machine gun than get a library book, dismiss it as an inconvenient truth.
Of course, Mallard is interviewed favorably by the media because they believe what she is doing is righteous and just. Then in another astounding lack of common sense, she admits on camera that she ‘knew what she was doing, but the gun had already been rendered inoperable.' Sorry Mrs. Mallard, the fact that the rifle may or may not have been rendered inoperable is inconsequential to creating an illegal SBR. For public defenders, the next time you defend a gang member with a sawed-off shotgun or rifle with a 3″ barrel, just use the defense, that your client is pretty sure the gun didn't work anyhow.
In Mallard's defense, she is not the only moron posting to the internet videos of themselves creating SBR's in the name of ‘gun safety.' I stopped looking after I came across the third such video. The complete ridiculousness of violating gun laws, in order to petition for more gun laws, was hurting my brain.
Why does this matter? The DOJ is ‘investigating' Mallard. But does anyone really think she will face charges? How about any of the other brainiacs that want to teach us how to be more compassionate and caring human beings by making illegal SBR's? I'm going to guess that none of them will.
On the flipside, Mrs. Allen's and Mrs. Leach are gun owners, supporters of gun rights. They are simply deplorables who probably cling to their Bibles just as tightly as they do to their guns. If they actually don't, who cares, it sounded good when former President Obama said it. People like Mrs. Allen and Mrs. Leach are not smart enough to understand just how bad they are. Only with the help of highly educated elites, can these people be shown the error of their way.
In this religion of Anti-Gunners, there is no differentiation between the millions of law-abiding gun owners who have never hurt anyone and the few psychopathic monsters that choose to use a gun instead of a knife, bomb truck, or blunt object to kill. The concealed carrier who stops a mass shooting with a firearm is indistinguishable from the mass shooter himself. This is why the NRA and its members are the killers of children, not the sick person who pulled the trigger.
Gun Laws Exist For a Reason:
As a former cop, I know the importance of extremely strict gun laws. I believe in gun enhancement charges and stiff sentences for violators. If anyone uses a gun in the commission of a crime, he or she should be locked up for as long as possible.
The problem, is that these arbitrary and overreaching laws only punish law-abiding citizens. The very people the laws were supposedly enacted to protect. Creating a class of instant felons, for simply crossing an invisible line. One side of the line, you're a law-abiding concealed handgun carrier. Step across the line, and you face the same charges as a gang member toting an illegal firearm. Does that seem fair or make sense to anyone?
Perhaps it's not meant to be fair. Is it possible that these laws are designed to make legally carrying a firearm so difficult that people stop doing it? Is it possible that laws like these are passed under the guise of public safety, but really only punish law-abiding citizens who wouldn't have killed anyone in the first place? I think anyone who truly takes time to study the epic failure of gun-control laws knows the answer to that question.
More gun laws have shown they are not effective and the new round of laws will be no different. The only thing that arbitrary gun laws do is turn otherwise law-abiding Americans into criminals. Even you, Mrs. Mallard. Leave your thoughts on this nonsense in a comment below.