In the wake of the Orlando shooting, media outlets are screaming for a ban on “Assault Weapons”. The implication being that restricting the sale and purchase of firearms will make America safer. But would a ban on firearms, of any kind, have changed the outcomes of the recent terror sprees that we have witnessed across the globe?
Navy SEAL Dom Raso weighs in…
There you have it, folks. A Navy SEAL thinks this is the gun you need to protect yourself. And, as he so aptly pointed out, these are the guns Obama and Clinton both expect their personal security details to have. Why would they try to stop you from having the same protective capabilities?
It’s about control. They want to control you. If you cannot protect yourself, then they are free to pass any laws they want and to revoke any freedoms they choose. Like your right to free speech and freedom of religion.
Giving up your right to arms is tantamount to surrendering every other freedom you have. If you don’t believe me, just ask the Lakota people at Wounded Knee. Oh, wait. You can’t. Over two hundred Lakota surrendered their firearms to the United States Government and were subsequently massacred. And that, by the way, was the largest mass shooting in America, not the Orlando shooting. It was perpetrated by the very government that promises to protect you.