NRA: Non Reasonable Actions

With the latest rhetoric from the NRA, it is just plain stupid and pig-headed in light of the mass shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary. Now don't get this twisted, I fully support the 2nd Amendment to our US Constitution. But as a veteran of military service there is no need for members of American society to have the military grade firepower of assault weapons such as AR-15's, AK-47's, Mac-10's, MP-5, or M-16's. I'm pretty sure that if the framers of the US Constitution had had the foresight to know that the kind of firepower of the aforementioned guns would be created, they wouldn't be included under the 2nd Amendment plain and simple.

There's no way NRA Leader Wayne LaPierre could truthfully tell me or anyone else, that the guns pictured here would have ever been included under the 2nd Amendment rights by the authors of the constitution. For these weapons are meant to be in the hands of soldiers in the field of battle engaged in combat operations. The average sportsman doesn't need this kind of firepower to hunt any kind of prey known to mankind, anything else would a boldface lie and an insult to anyone of average mental competency.

Under that logic even big game hunters have guns designed for that specific purpose say a Mossberg 30 30 for example. I am sure that in it's original form the Gatling gun is or wasn't included under the 2nd Amendment. So why is it so difficult to get the NRA to go along with the ban of the aforementioned weapons, this really would be the rhetorical $64,000 dollar question. To get a reasonable and logical answer from the NRA, be prepared for a trip to crazy-town. They'll blame everything on everybody else like politicians, video games, movies, music videos and even the mainstream media but not the gun manufacturers.

Heaven forbid the gun makers should actually be shouldering the brunt of the responsibility for their weapons, but that would affect their bottom-line financially speaking. So that's what they've got the NRA for, so that they don't have to hurt their bottom-lines. With a hint of common sense they NRA just MIGHT see that banning the likes of the semi-automatic assault weapon is actually in the best interests of the country as a whole. Considering the fact that nobody really needs this type of firepower for home, personal protection or hunting, it's not an infringement upon anybody's 2nd Amendment Right if they don't need the kinds of guns in question to begin with in the first place.

Their deranged sense of loyalty to the gun manufacturers and/or the 2nd Amendment is admirable but totally displaced when it comes to a question of public safety. And as far as the high capacity magazines (clips), in the hands of a proficient or skilled shooter no more than 3 shots are needed to take down any particular target. Thereby diminishing the odds of a stray bullet hitting an unintended target (innocent bystander) astronomically.

In conclusion the NRA's only logical argument is over monetary issues and not any potential infringements of anyone's 2nd Amendment Rights. Therefore I suspect it's about the money and political clout for gun manufacturers as their powerful gun lobbyist in Washington, otherwise it's only a matter of proper perspective (common sense) to ban assault weapons from the general public's use. A bit of advice to the NRA & Wayne LaPierre, get over yourself and think about the victims at Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook Elementary and the movie theatre in Aurora, Colorado. That Ban on Assault weapons in imminent so deal with it!