Gun Control, Terrorism, and AR-15—7 Things You Should Know

Craig HueyNational Security5 Comments

Gun Control, Terrorism, and AR-15—7 Things You Should Know

Mass murder in Orlando!

The left wants more gun control. President Obama and fellow U.S. Senators staged a filibuster to demand gun control.

But will taking away the guns solve the problem of mass murder or Islamic terrorism in our society?

Christians have been targeted in churches, much of the time because assailants believe that the members in the congregation will be unarmed.

There is so much misinformation about the latest terrorist attack in Orlando, and the Body of Christ needs to be informed about the dangers

Here are 7 things you should know:

  1. The AR-15 is not an assault weapon, and Omar Mateen did not even use an AR-15 at the night club! The news media repeatedly reported the wrong weapon was used in the Orlando mass murder massacre. And it’s not the first time the media have done so.
  1. Most murders are not committed with an assault weapon, so an assault weapons ban would be useless to stop these types of crimes.
  1. Nations with strict gun control laws, like the United Kingdom, report higher crime rates all around, along with a general sense of unease among many that crime is getting worse and they have no power to prevent it.
  1. Chicago, Illinois has the strictest gun control measures in the country, and has the highest murder rates, too. From 2012, the city witnessed 500 murders, surpassed in more recent years.
  1. States with the highest numbers of legal gun ownership also have the lowest gun crime rates.
  1. Numerous studies, from liberal to conservative, from academic to popular media, have affirmed that gun control does not prevent crime.
  1. Contrary to the opinion of gun control activists, gun ownership—particularly concealed carry—has saved many lives, including in churches.

What do you think? Email me at craig@electionforum.org.

5 Comments on “Gun Control, Terrorism, and AR-15—7 Things You Should Know”

  1. Amendment 2 – Right to Bear Arms:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    The primary intent of our 2nd Amendment is to prevent ‘democide’ (citizens murdered by their own government). The primary intent of our 2nd Amendment is to give ‘aspiring-tyrants’ who deceive their way into government where they are likely to use the pretense of ‘national security’ to empower themselves and their accomplices, a ‘healthy-fear’ of the citizens they are to serve yet intend to enslave. Something world history taught America’s founders was so necessary for America’s survival, they placed this inalienable right for individuals to bear arms immediately following the right to free speech. To somehow suggest this is no longer applies because there today exist ‘weapons of mass destruction’ potentially used by terrorists, is to suggest that God given an inalienable-rights can be alienated provided there exists threats of the appropriate magnitude such that government should achieve a monopoly on guns based lethal force. This, as if know sociopaths or mass murderers ever deceive their way into government.

    If we foolishly follow the gun-law foolishness of Europe, Canada, Australia, etc, by allowing politicians to claim they are ‘not disarming us’ while incrementally doing so through ever increasing Gun laws, then our constitutionally recognized God given inalienable-right to self-defense will be negated. Stunningly, many constitutional-schizophrenics claiming conservatism like Bill O’Reilly, attempt to deconstruct the original-intent of the 2nd Amendment by fixating on the portion of it referencing a “well regulated militia.” Anyone who has read the writings of the founders to ascertain original-intent should have no problem ascertaining that it included the intent of ensuring government never attained a monopoly on gun based lethal force.

    Continually passing gun control laws thereby incrementally disarming American citizens while claiming ‘no such intent,’ conveniently assumes something that history proves to be deadly. That criminals, including intelligent and powerful sociopaths, never deceive their way into government and engage in mass murder. Historical fact addressed by research found at the following web link to the University of Hawaii. Research documenting the 262 million people murdered by their own governments in the past century. None of which would have happened if individual citizens had preserved and exercised their God-given inalienable right to bear arms. See the statistics on demoside at: http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/MURDER.HTM

  2. If gun control/regulation laws is not a viable solution than what is a proposed solution to what is an incredibly horrific issue we have in this nation with gun violence? Does the constitutional right to bear arms mean anything to the families morning innocent people dead from gun violence? People are dying by the hands of our own citizens and this isn’t even a war. This can’t be about which side is right and which is wrong. It can only be about which solutions save lives. I’d like to hear some ideas around that.

    1. Addressing the symptom, or in this case the instrument of violence, is like putting a band aid on an infected wound. Approximately as many people are killed by drunk drivers each year as by guns. Should we ban cars? We need to address the root cause, which is the environment/culture of violence. Sadly, this points to the moral decline of the country, and the family unit in particular.

    2. While I cannot imagine the horrific pain experienced by the families of those murdered in our nation’s most recent mass murder, please consider that your question of, “Does the constitutional right to bear arms mean anything to the families morning innocent people dead from gun violence?” is of far less relevance then the question of, would a constitutional right to bear arms that would have saved the 262 million people murdered by their own governments in the past century mean anything to the families morning the death of these hundreds of millions of innocent people?

      262 million people murdered by their own governments who may well be alive today had they preserved, protected, and defended the original-intent of a constitution like America’s existing amended constitution. Add to that, the millions of American soldiers who gave up their lives to defeat the tyrants who murdered the above mentioned 262 million innocent citizens, and the result is several hundreds of millions of citizens murdered by their own governments. All evidencing the deadly result inherent in attempting to to solve the problems of a nation infected with moral-relativism by incrementally disarming its citizens, thereby empowering perspective mass murderers who will murder on a far grander scale than America has recently experienced in its schools, shopping malls, theaters, and nightclubs.

      Emotionalized reactions today that end up with government in the future having a monopoly on gun base lethal force, only serves to attempt to solve an existing problem by creating a far more deadly future problem that World history proves is likely to be fatal to our children and grandchildren.

  3. This is not a Christian forum – come on, you’re not fooling anyone. This is a conservative forum. If Jesus himself endorsed Clinton you would still endorse the GOP, NRA, and every other hate-fueled organization that protects your money, guns, and outdated ideologies.

Leave a Reply