AFI Home Page
PRESS: "Today's criminals and gangs
outgun our cops."
AFI: Criminals and gangs would definitely outgun
innocent citizens if the press has its way. And criminals do NOT outgun
our police. Massive back-up can be provided police officers in a few minutes.
The "fire power" of the government includes the military, which
has nuclear weapons! How many street gangs have tank divisions? Open battles
between crooks and the police happen only in the movies, NOT the real world.
The press can't tell the difference between the real world and the movies.
PRESS: "Our children are being threatened,
murdered and cut down in the streets."
PRESS: "There is no sporting purpose for
a semi-automatic firearm."
AFI: This is patently untrue. Semi-automatics
are widely used in hunting and marksmanship. Many of the so-called "children"
are drug dealers who have already killed someone else. They are public school
products of a left-wing school system that produces criminals. A 16-year-old
drug dealer is a "child" only in the strict technical use of the
word. If "gun control" made "children" safe, then why
is Washington, DC the most dangerous city in the industrialized world? If
you buy into the media's twisted view of the world, then you would have
to believe we could stop the drug trade by banning plastic bags.
PRESS: "The 2nd Amendment does not protect
the right to own military or semi-automatic arms."
AFI: If the Second Amendment doesn't protect
military weapons ("a well-regulated militia ..."), then what does
it protect? If it doesn't protect anything, why was it put there? To believe
the anti-freedom groups, we'd have to believe Thomas Jefferson, George Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, etc., just wrote words with no meanings.
We'd have to believe they really said that only a government has a right
to self protection.
PRESS: "With tens of millions of people
owning guns, the potential for lawlessness and gun massacres increases ten
fold each year."
AFI: Non sequitur. Gun ownership by law-abiding
citizens for sporting and defensive use does not have any bearing on criminal
gun use, except as a deterrent to crimes of personal violence. FACT: The
Old West, when everyone was armed, was about 10,000% safer than New York
City, or Washington, DC today. The Press assumes the very worst scenario
for every firearm in existence. That's as twisted and stupid as assuming
the very worst scenarios for every car or plane trip.
PRESS: "The current crime wave can touch
any community and social strata."
AFI: Crimes of personal violence are most frequent
in areas with the strictest gun control. Communities and social strata with
extensive gun ownership, and little gun control, are affected less by "the
current crime wave." Also, the rich who support anti-freedom groups
have private police and well protected communities. But the working class
do NOT. So called "gun control" is very racist and, without question,
class warfare. It's the rich and well protected disarming the working class.
It's an attempt to establish serfdom in America. It's the belief that America
should be a giant plantation.
PRESS: "Handguns have no purposes other
than killing people."
AFI: Well, they do: (marksmanship and hunting
among others), but killing a violent attacker is a life-saving use of handguns.
Does the press believe that victims should simply endure their torture,
or that people should watch idly as their family members are murdered? If
we were to follow this stupid line to its end, we'd have to disband the
Army on the grounds our Army makes us less safe because it possesses guns.
Would we be more safe if we took all the firearms away from the police?
PRESS: "Households with guns are 43 times
more likely to have their guns used against a family member than those households
without guns."
AFI: A propaganda slogan based on the crooked
use of numbers. 37 of those 43 killings are suicides, and most of the rest
take place in criminals' families. The "study" that produced those
numbers did not take into account defensive uses of firearms that did not
result in death. It's like saying hospitals should be closed because they
accidently kill 30,000 people a year. But how many more do they save? Would
closing hospitals make people feel safer? Would we really say: "I feel
a lot better with the hospitals closed because now I'm NOT going to die
in a hospital accident."
PRESS: "Self-defense is no legitimate
reason for owning a gun."
AFI: Researcher Gary Kleck produced conclusive
evidence that firearms are used successfully and frequently in defense against
crime. Further, defense against individual crime is not the only defensive
purpose of firearms; defense and deterrent against tyranny is a vastly more
important use, and the main reason for the 2nd Amendment. Perhaps the rich
anti-freedom zealots don't think an average worker's life is worth saving
with a firearm, but that worker does! Average workers believe that protecting
their lives is a very legitimate use of firearms.
PRESS: "The vast majority of crime guns
are bought legally."
AFI: That depends, of course, on how much gun
control there is. In cities like New York, no "crime guns" are
bought legally, yet criminal gun use is still rampant. It's a stupid no-place
argument. It's like saying most "crime cars" are bought legally.
It gets you nowhere. Another media twisting of words to confuse the issue,
while in effect saying that top-down authoritarianism is the solution.
PRESS: "Most gun dealers sell thousands
of guns illegally to gangs and criminals every day."
AFI: Huh? No evidence, just a bold lie. As
good an example of "hate politics" and group discrimination as
can be found anyplace. A perfect example of the left-wing, gun-hate groups
becoming victims of their own propaganda. The Clintonistas really believe
there are gun dealers selling to gangs and that's why we have crime.
The left-wing press describes "other
pressing points:"
PRESS: "Military Assault weapons. The
confusion in the general public's mind between semi-automatic weapons can
work in our favor. Constantly dropping the words - submachine gun, fully
automatic, machine gun, military weapon, high-tech killing machine are good
debater's tricks to instill a sense of dread over these weapons. Ultimately
people will learn to dread these weapons just like chemical warfare weapons
and toxic waste dumps."
AFI: Here the press is deliberately misleading
the public! There is no substantive difference between an "assault"
semi-automatic weapon and any other semi-automatic weapon. Fully automatic
weapons, while heavily restricted, are legal in the U.S. Legal full auto
weapons owners are never involved in crime, period.
PRESS: "Semi Automatic Weapons. Remember
that there is no place for any kind of semi auto weapon in a safe society
regardless of how it looks, since many so-called sport rifles can be easily
converted to a military configuration. Thus all semi- automatic weapons
are capable of being called 'assault weapons'. Never let up on this fact."
AFI: Here they admit the previous point, that
sport rifles and "assault" rifles are essentially similar. Why
a small-caliber semi- automatic rifle is so much more deadly than a shotgun,
I haven't a clue. Once again, are we to make the USA safer by disbanding
the Army because they have military rifles? Would we be safer by banning
all police because they have semi-auto weapons? Firearms do NOT grow arms
and legs and rob stores all by themselves. "Semi-auto" is NOT
semi-human.
PRESS: "Endangerment of Children. It is
difficult for the Gun groups to counter arguments which call attention to
the endangerment of children. Making the opposition look callous creates
an image of brutality and indifference to the audience. Keep this point
in the forefront of any public argument."
AFI: Rely on emotion not facts, the press is
saying. Because the facts are against them. A child whose parents have firearms,
and knows how to use them, is a child safer from personal violence and crime.
Under most religious principles, it's the duty of the father to protect
his family, and with the best weapons he can buy.
PRESS: "Enough is enough. Americans are
sick and tired of the violence that is infecting our society. Press forth
this point and other points of a related nature. It is time for action,
to take back our streets from crime. If we don't take action now, this crime
wave will engulf America. Again be sure to press the point that the Gun
Lobby opposes action to counter this crime wave."
AFI: Again I will press the point that firearms
are frequently and successfully used in defense against crime, and that
criminals ignore gun control laws. Let's take back our streets by defending
them. All "gun control" ever did was make America's streets safe
for crooks. In fact, 98% of crime has nothing whatsoever to do with firearms,
but the press confuses the issue by framing all crime to be firearms crimes.
PRESS: "Assault Weapons - the Choice of
criminals. Assault weapons are the weapons of choice for gangs, mentally
deficient individuals, and criminals across the board. The Gun Lobby argues
that anyone at any time should have the right to buy and own these weapons
of mass destruction."
AFI: Out-and-out lie. The BATF's own statistics
show that of the ten guns most used in crime, only #9 is an "assault"
weapon. Shotguns and revolvers are more common. The media's strategy is
the old Marxist "one slice of bread at a time" till they get the
whole loaf. There are no good firearms or bad firearms, there are only good
people and bad people. Morality is NOT products based, it's people based.
"Assault weapons" is NOT a real world crime issue, it's a trust
issue. The anti-freedom groups do NOT TRUST anyone, they are completely
paranoid.
PRESS: "Too Many Guns in the U.S. There
are over 200 million guns in America today. One for every man, woman and
child in the United States. Push the fact that each one of these killing
machines poses a grave threat to our population."
AFI: Aside from their numbers being a little
off, this argument sweeps aside all legitimate uses of firearms, sporting
and defensive. Over half of all U.S. households own at least one gun. If
guns are "killing machines" then why isn't the population being
decimated by half? 99.9% of those 200 million guns will never be used in
crime, while a significant portion of them will be used in defense against
crime. They provide their owners with a psychological sense of well-being
and protection. A sense of protection which the left-wing refuses to provide.
Once again, the press assumes that all firearms end in the very worst possible
scenario, and nobody can be trusted.
PRESS: "Assault Ammunition = Military
Firepower = Death. The ammunition for military arms are more powerful and
more devastating than normal ammunition. This type of ammo if not banned,
should have the delivery systems (a.k.a. assault weapons) banned at least."
AFI: Death = bad when it is murder, Death =
good when it is defense. If you are being attacked by a large assailant,
you should be able to take him down in one shot, whether you are small,
a woman, elderly or whatever. Once again, if "assault ammunition"
is bad by itself, then why not make the USA safer by disbanding the Army,
Navy and Air Force which has lots of "assault ammunition?" The
real "assault" is an "assault" on the United States
Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The real "assault" is on
average working class folks. Also, there is no real difference between so-called
"assault ammo" and all other ammo. It's an underhanded anti-freedom
word trick to ban all ammo.
In 1996, America's #1 problem is a crisis of trust. Tens of millions
of honest, hard working and responsible citizens do
not trust the government, and the Democratic Party does not trust
the average American worker. Bill and Hillary Clinton and all the Clintonistas
do NOT trust the average American worker. So called "assault rifles"
have almost nothing to do with crime. "Assault rifles" in relation
to crime in America are statistically nonexistent.
Republicans: The way to handle the "assault
rifle issue" is to NOT get trapped into the phony "guns cause
crime issue." Jump over that to the real issue: TRUST.
What's wrong with an honest and proven responsible American citizen having
an "assault rifle?" Who are the Clintonistas afraid of? Honest
people? Why are the Clintonistas and the left-wing press afraid of an armed
American worker population? Most importantly, if trust is at crisis levels
(and it is), why doesn't the government say "we can be trusted"
and put its mouth and actions in the same gear. Why don't they say that
those who are responsible can buy assault rifles? The renewal of trust would
be worth a million times more than the very few problems that would arise.
This is the correct way to argue the assault rifle issue. When the assault
rifle issue comes up in the Clinton/Dole Presidential debates, Bob Dole's
question to Bill Clinton should be: "I trust the American people, don't
you?"
Sincerely,
Andrew Molchan
NAFLFD Director
Ron Moore
F.D.G.
1996 CAMPAIGN STRATEGY: In the real world "assault
rifles" are a non-problem. However, Clinton will ruthlessly exploit
this issue in his usual crooked way because he knows he can get the left-wing
press' 120% cooperation, and it takes the attention away from the real issue:
America's crisis of trust.
1996 SOLUTION: Make firearms a non-issue by
promising (and, in 1997, doing) the passage of a specific bill with at least
$25 million in funding to completely, top to bottom, explore the total "assault
rifle" issue, and the total firearms, crime, social effect, cultural
effects, Constitution, Bill of Rights, civilization relevance, media effects,
everything in the biggest, most inclusive study that $25 million in funding
will buy.
SHORT TERM: Say the difference between the
Democrats and Republicans is that Democrats want to pass multi-million dollar
legislation that brings the government into people's bedrooms based on what's
in the movies. While Republicans want to find out what's really happening
before they attack the Bill of Rights. If the study comes to the conclusion
that firearms really are the root cause of crime, then you promise appropriate
follow-up legislation. The bottom line is that the American people can trust
you to do it, while nobody can really trust Clinton to do anything except
lie and mislead everyone.