Gun Control: Elitist Law

Most do not know it, but the basis behind Gun Control is elitist in nature. It started with the Sullivan Act in New York, the Gun Control Act of 1934, and the dates in between, commonly known as the "roaring 20's". Were you aware that the first gun control laws were racist in nature, an attempt to keep the "sons of Ham" from carrying firearms and "intoxicating liquors" onboard trains and causing havoc?

Here is found the legacy of gun control: It stems from rich people's fear of poor people.

Modern Gun Control is insidious, designed to affect the smallest, most fringe faction of the "gun culture" as they like to brand firearms owners. Gun Control, like tyranny, also targets those least able to fight back, many times these very fringe factions. I cite as my primary example: "Junk gun lawsuits."

These lawsuits will never affect those passing the laws, nor thousands of other gun owners, nor the gun advocates, nor probably any card-carrying member of the NRA. Want to know why? Because those folks I just mentioned KNOW the difference and can AFFORD it. No firearms enthusiast would ever get caught DEAD with a Jennings J-22 in his pocket, and if he did, he'd explain it away as "it's a friend's" or "it's for my wife," (what he must think of HER?) mostly because such firearms are considered substandard BY THE FIREARMS COMMUNITY. That's right. Those folks screaming about rights don't actually care about YOURS, they care about THEIRS.

Even among gun owners, this attitude is prevalent. "Hey, I got mine. Who cares if you ever get yours?" Not a direct quote, but the general attitude amongst those who already have the dwindling supply of "pre-ban" rifles is "hey, I got mine." This attitude is prevalent and promotes a class differential between the "gun haves" and the "gun have nots".

To most low income households, a firearm is only something thought of when something bad is happening right outside. And then it's merely hatred of the guns and the people who carry and use them, be it the druggies, the thugs, or the police. To a poor person, the only difference is that the police are a lot stronger than anyone else and society allows them to behave the way they do. To a poor person, law enforcement is just another street gang with guns. They equate guns with power, know they are powerless, and rage against such inequity, only not so loud as to attract attention. Many of the working poor live in public housing, relying upon the city or county for basic shelter needs, including protection. Take a trip through there some time to see how well government runs things.

These are the same folks, that sparkling, efficient, well-meaning government, that wants to make your world "safer" by taking those evil icky nasty guns away from you. Starting with the folks most directly under their control: The poor. Did you know that in most public housing, firearms are prohibited, yet there are shootings there constantly? Way out of proportion for their population.

That's Gun Control for you: Making neighborhoods safer for thugs, one gun control law at a time.

So then Gun Control realized that there was a whole CLASS of firearms bought and used predominantly by poor people; Better yet, these guns were looked down on with disdain by "serious" shooters. "Real" firearms enthusiasts didn't deal with such things. What better target could present itself to the Gun Control people, except to have "BAN ME" stamped on the side of their zinc frames?

These "Junk guns," which, through effective "lawsuit legislation" have become much rarer, were made by companies such as Sundance Industries, Jennings, Raven, Bryco, and Phoenix Arms. Generally, they were made partly out of zinc, partly of steel, with little bitty plastic parts and simple, striker-fired mechanisms and, more often than not, flashy "chrome" plating or flat black paint. I've taken a few apart in my time. They're cheap.

But they work. I also took one or two to the range. They hit acceptably at close ranges and functioned reasonably reliably (one stovepipe in .380, two failures to fire in .22 long rifle). Would I purchase one? No. Why? Because I know and can afford better.

But there are folks out there who are less fortunate than us. They still live, you know. Uncomfortably, sometimes miserably, but they still exist and survive. And they are many times primary victims of repeated attacks because they are the least capable of fighting back. Those very "junk guns" which I wouldn't own, have saved their lives many a time.

Even a single mother could afford an 85 dollar .32 or .380 from these companies. Granted, it's not a true manstopper. No police officer would carry one as a duty, or for that matter, even a backup weapon, but they DID have a niche, that, considering the amount of competition and the number of companies churning them out, a very viable one.

Yes, bad guys bought them too. As they buy or otherwise acquire everything else normal people buy. The only difference between a law abiding citizen and a criminal is how they choose to live. Bad guys acquired and used them for many of the same reasons poor people did: They were inexpensive and they worked.

Banning them only hurt the poor people, though, since bad guys usually stole them anyhow.

So now the bad guys have the guns, and the poor do not. WE, our society, has made yet another class of victims.

By being snobs, elitists, and, dare I say it, RACISTS, we have yet again made more victims to be "taken care of" by our growing welfare state.

Go ahead. Take away the only means of protection a single mother has. Feel good that it wasn't you, you elitist bastards. Don't worry, you're higher on the food chain. You carry an NRA card; You have lobbyists who whisper in the ears of senators and representatives in hotel rooms in Washington. Why should you care about people lower than you on the food chain?

But make no mistake, if you are for ANY kind of "Control", you are anti-freedom. Period. You can deceive yourself or call me names, or argue all you want. That's my assertion. Period. I will not be convinced otherwise because unlike you, I live down there, where you fear to tread, and see these people every single day, and what's worse, I'm educated enough to know that WE THE PEOPLE have done this to them, and eventually, we will do it to OURSELVES. The more governmental control we have over ANYTHING, the less free we are to make our own decisions, leaving those decisions in the hands of people who are not only less interested, but also poorly qualified, in making them for us.

I realize the unpolished nature of this article. It was written in haste in response to someone who said to me "Well, I'd never have an (insert "inferior" type of firearm here) in MY collection!"

That's just what a Gun Control advocate listens for to find her next target. A portion of the "gun culture" that isn't very well accepted by their peers.

And it occurred to me that this is a very real method of divide and conquer being used today, in real time, by the Gun Control folks in order to inch by inch make every american citizen dependent upon the government.

Hey, isn't that tyranny?

Book her, Dano.

Support the finest site on the web. Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD-
It is in the breaking news sidebar!

The same also applies in the high-income direction: there are a lot of NRA-types who think can't afford a .50 and don't know anyone who can. "They might try to ban them but that won't affect me or anyone I know," they might think. The same applies to a lot of hunters who share the gun grabber's disdain for "assault weapons" which they don't own and don't intend to. Part of the mission of a civil rights activist is telling the other Lutherens that it does matter if they start taking away all the Jews, communists, and homosexuals, as it were.

Your “preaching to the choir” here my friend. The very first firearm I bought for my wife to shoot was a Davis .308. First I didn’t know any better, second I didn’t let her carry it, just shoot it at the range. At the time the only handgun I owned was a S&W .44 MAG, A bit much for her.

That was many weapons ago. I still have the old Davis but use it primarily as an example of what not to buy. Other than being a lightweight, it would make a good home defender where you didn’t have to chamber a round until you needed it; but I would hate to carry it with one in the pipe.

My wife has moved on to an ASTRA A-90 9mm. A very compact but lethal weapon that she carries everywhere. Me I’m a good old Colt .45 man; never leave home without it.

As long as it doesn’t blow up in your hand, the rest is training; as I mentioned not carrying the Davis with a round chambered.

I have a friend who calls herself a “good ole’ Johnson Democrat”. She once asked me if it bothered me that there were “all those guns” out there. My response: “NO!, makes me feel safer”.

I AM a card-carrying NRA member and as far as I can tell you, the NRA and the NRA-ILA fought the "saturday night special" bans ("affordable handguns for low-income people" as they prefer to (more accurately) call them), they successfully fought the 50cal ban in California(?) and are vehemently against "assault weapon" bans. The only guns the NRA could conceivably fight against would be those that are dangerous by their very design due to extremely shoddy manufacturing (and even still, would merely suggest an equally-affordable model).

Coloradan Wrote:
The same also applies in the high-income direction: there are a lot of NRA-types who think can't afford a .50 and don't know anyone who can. "They might try to ban them but that won't affect me or anyone I know," they might think. The same applies to a lot of hunters who share the gun grabber's disdain for "assault weapons" which they don't own and don't intend to.

Well said, and exactly my point. It doesn't matter WHERE you are in the "gun culture" as we are called. ANY encroachment of this very basic civil right has disastrous results. Not "Will have"...but DOES HAVE. Nobody believed it when airlines first started to have metal detectors, as directed by the FAA. Now we have September 11 to remind us how dangerous gun control is in practice.

Not that anyone listens.

"First they came for the Communists,
and I didn?t speak up,
because I wasn?t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn?t speak up,
because I wasn?t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn?t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me."

I don't want to be the last man standing. I will stand up sooner than that, as should we all.

CCCV Wrote (Spelling corrected:)
You're "preaching to the choir" here my friend. The very first firearm I bought for my wife to shoot was a Davis .380.

Agreed. But alas, the Choir is not following their music because they are listening to Satan's counterpoint. I'm just trying to get them to weed out the false notes because they're starting to sound terrible, and what kind of impression do we think this makes on the congregation?

schlitzsmoke wrote:
I AM a card-carrying NRA member and as far as I can tell you, the NRA and the NRA-ILA fought the "saturday night special" bans ("affordable handguns for low-income people" as they prefer to (more accurately) call them), they successfully fought the 50cal ban in California(?)
To which I reply:

As am I. And I am aware of the ILA's activities. The trouble is, some of us who carry our cards are a bunch of elitist jackasses, no better than the gun control advocates themselves. "With friends like these..."
I theorize that in order to appear more "mainstream", the NRA membership has been diluted to include the very kind of elitist twits who ghost-run Handgun Control Inc, which is barely more than a mailing list these days. What a sham. It's a shame Congress can get suckered so easily.

But if we, the people, can be suckered, why should we expect Congress to be any different? Especially when many of them don't want to believe the truth?

Go figure.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.