These are just a couple of comments and questions on a reddit thread in response to the Robinson Speech before a City Hall meeting where I transcribed it and placed a link to his video of the speech on a previous steemit article. Here is the link. https://steemit.com/gundebate/@artistiquejewels/if-you-take-our-guns-away-are-the-criminals-still-keeping-theirs-the-law-abiding-citizens-in-this-country-are-the-first-taxed
Poster states, "As to your point about the AR15
not being a combat weapon, even though I support gun rights I have to say, your argument makes it sound like the weapon is pretty much not good for anything but shooting up schools."
My response: The school shooting would not have occurred if the local authorities called about Cruz's issues 39 times and the FBI would have followed the gun laws already in place. If Cruz really did as they said. A lot of holes in their story including many hearing multiple shooters, or other shots even when Cruz was walking out of the school. I noticed MSM doesn't address any of these issues though as it goes against the narrative they are pushing. This isn't my argument in the writing, it is the transcript of what Robinson stated at the meeting.
He comes back with, "None of that answers my point in any way. If you want to debate you sort of have to at least acknowledge the other person's statement."
I think fair enough, as I was focusing on the event as a whole.
My response: I didn't intend to ignore your statement. I just wasn't sure where you were going with the whole, "except to shoot up schools." This was Robinson's speech. I do agree with him as the AR15 is not an assault rifle. You may already know this, but it stands for ArmaLite. As far as shooting up the school, this could have been accomplished with any weapon.
As far as to the holes in the story or the narrative being pushed that I chose to address. . .clearly people have to look at the event, what took place during, around and prior to that event. You must look at it as a whole and all the components and people involved. You can't just pick out one angle, tool or alleged culprit and say, "ban the Ar15's because that's what was used in this shooting and other shooting!" If we do, won't the next triggered school shooter simply pick a different gun? Yes, because they have more access. . .they do not live within the parameters of the law; therefore, they won't just say, "darn, I guess I'll give up on my goal of shooting up a school because they have banned the weapon of choice I've heard so much about on the "tell a vision box" and here I featured it on my "kill bullies" vision board, dream over!" No, you and I both know they will find another gun, what MSM won't tell you is it will likely be one that may have a higher capacity magazine than what was used in the shooting. Did they say in their findings where they were trying to pin it on Cruz what size magazine was used? Some states limit the drum to 10 or 15 rounds, but they do make them available to hold far more rounds.
Once again, ban high capacity magazines, are they still out there somewhere available to the criminal element? Won't they just build their own weapon? Now, should the average law abiding citizen have a right to protect against that? Do we trust we won't get a Sheriff Israel giving a stand down order if we need a sheriff who is sworn to defend us? Will we have better odds?
The AR15 is lightweight, accurate and has a low recoil. Should we ban all guns that fit this description? Should we ban all semi-automatics? If we do will criminals still have access? They are also customizable. Should we ban all guns with add ons? What if some of the criminals continue to add on? There are far more powerful rifles on the market, so what happens when a different weapon starts getting so much attention and being used?
Still not sure why some of these vehicles that have been used to mow people down haven't been banned. When does that injustice end? I believe people realized that law abiding citizens were not using cars or vehicles as weapons, but rather it was the person driving the car at fault who clearly doesn't value life. The car, or in this instance the gun isn't making that life altering decision, it is the end user.
Same with the AR15! BTW it was reported a shooter identified by at least one of the victims was in full swat gear. This means they would have had access to an array of weapons/arsenal as most criminals do. Also odd how they had a drill just that morning. Some very interesting aspects and details surround this shooting, which those opposed never answer, nor seem willing to debate. But I am definitely game, I simply can't dismiss details that relate directly in favor of the MSM's singular focus. . . "The Gun, the Gun. Guns are bad! No more misery and mass deaths if we just ban them!"
Why zero focus on the at risk teen it was pinned on, and no apparent culpability from the array of people including law enforcement and FBI gun checks that failed him and the victims?
Here is another one. This was in my opinion an interesting take that deserved a response. He has a point, just not sure he sees the Big Picture! His question, "Wasn't the whole purpose of you guys having guns legally is to protect your right and dethrone the government from turning tyrannical which has been for quite some while?"
My response as follows: I see your point! This is what caused us all to stand in line as the Silent Majority! We do our best to follow the law, turn the other cheek, try to educate. . .sadly, the corruptors don't follow the law.
As was evidenced in the election, they will cheat by counting dead votes, illegals or voting numerous times. They will have their up and coming UN king state that no one will be prosecuted if they as illegals go ahead and vote. They bully in an attempt to get their way and shout about abolishing the laws they want to break. They don't want a standard.
The Silent Majority do not want innocents harmed in the process, and try to use all methods without force. The Silent Majority doesn't have any more cheeks to turn. We didn't stay silent in spite of the name calling, attacks and even physical violence we went out and voted. MSM kept pumping it through the airwaves that we didn't have a shot. They counted us out. . .this is why they were so deflated! She Was Supposed to Win! God and the Silent Majority didn't Cave! We won't cave now.
We continue to use means within the law to uphold the law. The other side wishes to change and break. . .we uphold. Do you see the a difference? I do. Make no mistake, we may be calmer and quieter in most instances, but we will take whatever stand is needed. Where We Go One, We Go All! Godspeed! WWG1WGA Don't forget who you are and the vital role you play Qarmy!