As a result of last weekend’s massacre in Tucson that left Arizona Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords fighting for her life and six people murdered, lawmakers on Capitol Hill have already proposed further gun control legislation.
While it was unsurprising that gun control advocate Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, New York Democrat, was one of the first to propose such legislation, fellow New Yorker Rep. Peter King, a Republican, has proposed a bill that would make it unlawful to carry a legal firearm within 1000 feet of a member of Congress.
Congresswoman Giffords is a gun owner herself. She, in fact, told The New York Times in a 2010 interview, she is the proud owner of the now vilified and very popular Glock caliber weapon. This is the same firearm that Mr. Loughner used to shoot her 19 others last Saturday.
“I have a Glock 9 millimeter, and I’m a pretty good shot,” she said last year. Other than revolvers, the Glock is actually relatively popular among armed females, particularly firearm instructors. Ms. Giffords represents the rising demographic of women, including myself, who have shot the well-favored Glock.
National Review’s Kevin Williamson does excellent analysis on the recent ridiculous attack of the Glock 9 mm caliber weapon:
As usual, the ghouls at the Brady Center follow hot on the trail of a murder; in this case they are arguing that, had the federal assault-weapons ban not been allowed to expire, the Tucson shooter would have had a hard time buying the magazine he used in the gun with which he shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. It is certainly not true that, as Salon put it, “Weapon in rampage was banned under Clinton-era law.” The weapon in question, a 9mm Glock 19 pistol, was not banned; neither were the 31-round magazines the shooter used. What was banned was the manufacture or importation of new magazines with a capacity of more than ten rounds.
That is not hair-splitting, inasmuch as high-capacity magazines for Glocks were and are commonplace — almost as commonplace as Glocks themselves — and remained so even while their manufacture and importation were banned. Most Glock 9mm magazines are usable in any Glock 9mm pistol, regardless of model. Glock makes at least four different 9mm pistols at the moment — 9mm being one of the most common calibers — and a high-capacity magazine sold for almost any of those could have been used in the Glock 19. Third-party manufacturers make them as well, and have made them for years and years, meaning that AWB or no AWB, finding one is not very difficult. The only difference the AWB is likely to have made is that the shooter would have had a used magazine instead of a new one (assuming he did in fact have a new one), and he probably would have paid five bucks more for it.
Mr. Williamson later points out the ridiculous notion of gun-control supporters that the Glock has a standard easy trigger pull:
Nor is it true that, as the Brady Center claims, “Glock pistols are particularly easy to fire, letting off rounds as quickly as the operator can pull the trigger.” All semiautomatic weapons let off rounds as quickly as the operator can pull the trigger; that is the definition of a semiautomatic weapon. The Glock 19 does not have a particularly light trigger pull — its standard trigger-pull weight is 5.5 pounds – and a great many high-quality modern handguns have adjustable triggers, anyway, for a variety of reasons. Many women and people with less hand strength, for example, prefer a lighter trigger.
Indeed, there are members of Congress from both sides of the aisle who want to arm themselves for protection while visiting their districts. Fox News reported:
Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, had a permit for a concealed weapon before the Arizona incident that killed six and wounded 14, including Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Chaffetz Press Secretary Alisia Essig told Fox News that Chaffetz has carried his gun to different events back in his district and plans to do so more often in the future.
A spokesman for Rep. Heath Shuler, D-N.C., said the congressman who challenged Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi for her spot atop the House Democratic Caucus also has a conceal and carry permit and expects to carry a gun more often.
“You never think something like this will happen, but then it does,” Shuler told The Politico newspaper. “After the elections, I let my guard down. Now I know I need to have (my gun) on me. We’re going to need to do a much better job with security at these events.”
Lawmakers are not the only ones who want to legally protect themselves from deranged people set out to kill others. Private citizens want protection too, so why the knee-jerk reaction on Capitol Hill to attempt to take that right away?
Lawful firearm owners like myself know one thing, if there is a weapon in the area, chances are, we have an opportunity to be one of the few who can protect ourselves and other innocent individuals around us.
Furthermore, having proper knowledge of firearms makes it easier to disarm a live weapon when law enforcement is not immediately available and seconds are precious.
Gun control pushers tend to forget that it was a legally armed private citizen who helped subdue the alleged Tucson gunman, Jared Lee Loughner. The New York Daily News reported on Tuesday how 24-year old Joe Zamudio reacted when he heard gun shots ringing outside of a store where he was buying cigarettes. Mr. Zamudio ran towards the danger:
“I was ready to end his life,” Joe Zamudio said. “I had my hand on the butt of my gun. If they hadn’t grabbed him and he was still moving, I would have shot him.”
“Damn right,” said Zamudio. “This is my country, this is my town.”
Zamudio, 24, spoke out three days after Jared Lee Loughner shot and wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and massacred six other people outside a Tucson supermarket.
“I was at the store buying cigarettes,” Zamudio said. “I was at the counter when I heard the gun shots. I put my hand on my gun and ran out.”
The presence of Mr. Zamudio did not turn the Tucson Safeway shopping center into a war zone. Instead, Mr. Zamudio, confident that he had his own protection and that he knew how to use it properly, put forth appropriate measures when he arrived at the scene.
This is not the first time a lawfully armed private citizen was able to stop a deranged shooter. In 2007, a church security guard in Colorado Springs fired her weapon and took down a crazed gunman who previously attacked parishioners at a missionary center 80 miles away. Both attacks resulted in the deaths of four people and five wounded persons.
During the 2005 Hurricane Katrina disaster, law enforcement officials reacted similarly to gun control advocates on Capitol Hill this week. Police demanded law abiding citizens to give up their lawfully owned firearms. The result? Criminals took advantage of the un-armed innocent New Orleans citizenry during post chaos of the hurricane. See video below:
Gun confiscation in New Orleans post-Hurricane Katrina:
An attempt to place gun control legislation immediately after tragic shooting is like trying to down tons of sugar to hold off falling asleep at the wheel for awhile. Like liberal “good intentions” it feels great at the time, but the sugar crash will be on its way.