I don’t normally do this, but Michael Savage, who I agree with on many issues, crossed a line that he shouldn’t have crossed. I’m sure that all of 200 people at best will see this, maybe one of them has a bigger platform than me.
This is an open letter to Michael Savage in reference to one of his latest diatribes on drum magazines and semi-auto rifles.
Michael’s position is one that to me is rather curious. He claims that he owns guns, or has owned guns, a couple of them that he mentioned are in fact semi-auto rifles. I heard him mention that he owned an AR-15 and a Ruger Mini-14. Both are semi-auto rifles, both can take similar magazines, including a drum magazine if it is available.
Michael says that no civilian should ever be allowed to own a drum magazine.
I say to Michael, you’re an idiot on this one.
He doesn’t want to hear anyone reference the Second Amendment when discussing this issue, which is silly in and of itself.
The Second Amendment wasn’t created so that we can go out and shoot targets, or hunt. It was created to give the people a way to defend themselves against a tyrannical government.
The idea behind the civilian being armed as our forefathers intended, was that the average Joe would be able to get the equivalent weapons that the military is using at the present time. That includes the magazines and ANY accessories that come along with them. Sure, the government regulates fully automatic weapons, and for good reason, but they are still available to the average Joe if he pays the taxes. But, the fact remains, the weapon of choice in America is the AR-15 and its cousins built along that pattern.
If I may quote Tench Coxe on this one:
“The powers of the sword are in the hands of the yeomanry from sixteen to sixty. The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American. What clause in the state or federal constitution hath given away that important right…. The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
Dr. Savage says that there are no legitimate sporting purposes for one of these magazines and that they were designed for the military. Please refer to my original premise. That’s precisely why American citizens should be allowed to have these magazines. We need some parity with the military if we are to fight for our freedom, should the need arise.
By limiting my choice of weapon, or magazine, you are essentially giving the government a bigger leg up on me if there should ever come a time that this government loses its direction and needs to be removed. Guess who we’d be fighting against? The military.
He also mentions body armor and that civilians should not be allowed to own that either. Why? If I want to buy body armor to protect myself against this already overbearing police state that we live in, then it is my absolute right to do so.
If the police can have it, then by God, so can I! Ever heard of a “police state?” If the circumstances warrant it, then guess who else we’ll be fighting?
Your arguments against either of these is pathetic and dangerous. You are so wrong on this one. I hope you see the error of your thinking before it pollutes the mind of any gullible traveler that happens to hear you.
Truth, Lies and In Between 