Give up my guns? Right after you do, politicians

Editor,

Given the current furor over “gun control,” which is now even more misleadingly referred to by many on the left as “gun safety,” I have a suggestion.

For the sake of argument, let’s ignore some facts. Those arguing for further restrictions on the Second Amendment generally ignore any and all facts conflicting with their point of view in any case, so this shouldn’t be any problem at all for them, and the point of this letter does not require them, so I mention just a few.

Let’s ignore the fact that when the Constitution was written, the muzzle-loading musket was the “assault weapon” of the time, as it was developed for military use and was common on the battlefield. By the time of the Civil War, these firearms were replaced with lever-action, magazine-fed rifles such as the Spencer and the Henry, also developed for military use and carried into battle.

In fact, let’s ignore the fact that “assault weapon” is a meaningless term. Baseball bats, kitchen knives and automobiles can all be used as “assault weapons,” and like all weapons, they require a user to be effective. Let’s ignore the fact that, according to FBI statistics, more murders are committed with hammers and clubs than with rifles of all types, and those same statistics show more murders are committed with hands and feet than with rifles. But enough of this; let us proceed. After all, we hardly need to argue whether to ban hands and tree branches.

There’s an old saying: What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Because well-protected, left-wing politicians and celebrities are so anxious to rid the nation of the dangers of firearms, it’s only reasonable that they should adhere to their own beliefs.

I therefore submit the following proposed amendment to be attached to every gun control bill coming before Congress: “All restrictions on firearms and ammunition placed upon the individual, law-abiding citizens of the United States shall apply equally and without exception to all law enforcement agencies, regulatory agencies and National Guard units. No citizen of the United States, including any member of Congress or other elected or appointed member of the federal government or of the individual states, may hire an armed guard or guards for his or her personal protection, protection of his or her property or for any other reason. Further, the federal government is hereby expressly prohibited from providing any such protection for any citizen or elected or appointed official except the president and vice president and their immediate families. Violation of this section shall constitute a first-degree felony on the part of all parties concerned.”

Surely, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Rosie O’Donnell, Michael Moore and even Barack Obama can see the inherent fairness of this action. If those of us who can’t afford to hire armed guards to protect our interests are to have our rights to keep and bear arms compromised, so should be theirs.

John Bauer
Daily Lobo reader