That’s because the only thing such weapons are good for is killing people -- and large numbers of them at that.
Except, of course, when those weapons are used to protect someone’s life.
But then, most Americans never hear those stories because the very same Pravda media neglects to cover most incidents involving the use of a gun to save or protect life.
And yet such instances happen all the time. Like recently, when a good man used his AR-15 to save the life of a person who had been stabbed.
As reported by WGN, a local television station in Chicago, Dave Thomas was witness to a knife attack that occurred following an argument at an apartment building in Oswego Township in Illinois. As the attack unfolded, he rushed into his place and retrieved his rifle before returning to the scene and ordering the attacker to stop.
"I poked my head out the door. There was a pool of blood, blood was everywhere in the hall. There was still a confrontation going on, there were about three or four people involved at this point,” he told the local media outlet.
“So I ran back into my house and grabbed my AR-15. I grabbed the AR-15 over my handgun — bigger gun, I think a little bit more of an intimidation factor. Definitely played a part in him actually stopping,” Thomas said.
Thomas didn’t have to fire a single shot, either; just wielding the weapon in a threatening manner was enough, as is most often the case involving self-defense or defense of life with a firearm.
“The AR-15 is my weapon of choice for home protection," Thomas said. "It's light, it's maneuverable. If you train and know how to use it properly, it's not dangerous. And this is just a perfect example of good guy with an AR-15 stopped a bad guy with a knife. And there were no lives taken, so, all in all, it was a good day.”
Other details about the story are noteworthy as well for what they tell us about certain areas of the country and how they are somehow permitted to selectively enforce the Second Amendment. (Related: EXISTING gun laws should have made it impossible for Texas church killer to buy a firearm.)
As if attempting to justify the reasoning behind Thompson’s ownership of such a “dangerous” rifle, the news site reported further:
Police say Thomas has a valid firearm owner's identification card and a concealed carry permit. Thomas says he is also a firearms instructor.
Why does anyone have to have a “firearm owner’s identification” and “concealed carry permit” in the first place? Do Illinoisans and Chicagoans have to have an identification card before they’re allowed to speak, worship, and express themselves freely?
Must they have a permit to enjoy the Constitution’s anti-discrimination protections? Do they have to register with authorities in order to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures? How about their rights to trial by jury — only if they pay homage to the state in the form of a ‘licensing fee’?
No American should ever be forced to seek government approval to freely exercise rights that are guaranteed all citizens under the Constitution. As for the Second Amendment, its language is clear — the “right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
If an average citizen living in the same place as Thomas and having witnessed the same act of violence did not have “government permission” to “keep and bear arms” then it’s quite possible that stabbing victim may not have lived.
That being said, citizens do protect themselves and others on a daily basis with firearms — even with sinister “assault” weapons. It’s a shame most media will never tell you that.
J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.