Gun rights

[DGTess]

I'll play, but only for a moment. I've had this discussion on this forum some time ago, and the level of discourse at this time in most every medium has kept me out.

If Congress or the administration wanted to do something for *safety*, they'd address simultaneously firearms laws, mental health laws, and societal violence. The fact they have not tells me they are using a tragedy to further a political agenda.

The fact they're attempting to ban standard-capacity magazines (which they call "high-capacity" and "clips" and dozens of other terms), semi-automatic rifles (which they call "automatic weapons" and other terms), and cosmetic features of standard rifles means they're playing games.

The fact they're exempting law-enforcement officers (in many cases, to include such "officials" as off-duty states' attorneys, city treasurers, etc.) says they're playing games. Granted, NY forgot to exempt police, but it's coming.

Firearms manufacturers are not the ones who will profit. FOR THE MOST PART, I suspect it will be the middle man, the dealer. As it should be. Supply and demand. I know I got soaked after the 2008 elections for an AK-47; others are doing the same thing now. (Why do I *need* an AK-47? Why did Rosa Parks *need* to sit at the front of the bus? I wanted one, and could afford it.)

Ammo manufacturers cannot keep up with the demand, so prices are going up. When Congress doesn't have the votes to pass bans, the prices will come back down.

The NRA won't lose anything. "The NRA" is being used to refer collectively to gun owners, a significant number of whom are not NRA members. NRA uses this to try to coerce gun owners to send them money; the more anti-freedom our gun laws become, the more money NRA can beg for. In fact, I would not be surprised if the NRA doesn't cave on some of the administration's requests - not because it's the right thing to do, but because they want to have leverage down the road.

On the self-defense issue, which I realize is not part of the original question ... I carry a firearm everywhere I legally can, because I never know where the next robber, rapist, meth head, or psychopath is coming from. I have been raped, and will NEVER let it happen again. In all the years I've carried, I've never used it, thank the gods. Only once have I had my hand on it, prepared (with my other hand on my phone) -- and there was a police officer not 40 feet away pointedly ignoring my assailant. One other time, I believe a bad guy came in to the business I was patronizing, but left when he saw my firearm. That was the sense I got from his demeanor, but since nothing happened, I'll never know if I'm one of the 2.5-million/year defensive handgun uses. I DO know that my area has significantly more handguns than a few miles away, and significantly lower crime rate. But not zero. I don't hunt. While I appreciate people who do, the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting.