Return to story
Guns in America are not about protecting the Second Amendment or self-defense. Guns are about business.
Is that necessarily wrong? No. The manufacturing and sale of guns creates jobs, purchasing power, and taxes. That is free enterprise, and there is nothing inherently wrong with it.
But the gun business and its political allies have taken us down a dangerous path composed of high-capacity magazines, assault rifles, and even the sale of sniper rifles to the civilians.
The domestic market for guns, excepting police and the military, should be limited to pistols, shotguns, and rifles intended for sport shooting and hunting. None should have a magazine capacity of more than five rounds. None should bear resemblance to an assault weapon, U.S. military or foreign.
As an adolescent, I learned to shoot shotguns and hunting rifles, participated in sport shooting events, and hunted with those weapons. As a Marine, I trained to shoot and employ a military pistol and assault rifle and carried those weapons in military operations.
The shotguns and rifles I carried as a youth were designed to kill animals. The pistol and assault rifle I carried as a Marine were designed to kill men.
Let's not allow debate about protection of the Second Amendment, or the supposed necessity for enhanced self-defense, or much less debate about the potential harm to domestic business keep us from banning high-capacity magazines and assault-style weapons from domestic sales.
We have a right to bear arms and nothing should challenge that right. But that right is not open-ended. Common sense and good law should not be trampled by special interest groups using fear-mongering (i.e., the government is attempting to take away your Second Amendment rights; without such weapons you will be more vulnerable to criminals, etc.) and money in a fight for public opinion and the intimidation of politicians.