Skip to content

Don’t Let Losers Win


Jayson Knight Managing Editor

There have been a lot of tragedies lately, and that does make me sad. I’m a good-news person. I’m more likely to read the portion of a newspaper featuring a dog show rather than one featuring a mass homicide. I don’t want to read about terrible things, especially when they happened far away. Lately, that’s proven impossible.

Though there have been no shortages, I have an opinion on the AR-15, the scary-looking rifle blamed for homicidal outbursts by whack jobs like the one that killed 49 people in Orlando, FL Sunday, June 12. I don’t know the guy’s name. I intentionally glance over it when I read this stuff. You know why? Because I agree with Chechen immigrant Ruslan Tsarni.

Tsarni is the uncle of the Boston Bombers, a pair of brothers who attacked innocent people enjoying the Boston Marathon in April of 2013. Tsarni loudly professed his nephews did what they did because they were “losers.”

That’s what all these wanna-be martyr mass murderers have in common. Not their religion, not their upbringing, and not their chosen weapon. It’s never a proud dad or a soccer mom. It’s some scumbag who had a choice between finding a path to success in this life or someone to take out their insecurities on, and chose the latter.

They do it for attention because they’re afraid of hard work. They’re grownup children who never learned to value duty over self. Get rid of all the religions, get rid of all the guns, get rid of all the whatever, and you’re still going to get losers taking out their insecurities on innocent people in unimaginable, horrid ways.

With or without an AR-15, these losers will find a way to hurt as many people as they can in one desperate, final plea for attention. Would there be less people hurt if there were no semiautomatic rifles? Maybe, unless bad guys learn to build a bomb, or close the exits and set a fire.

I understand that there are people who want to take away the ability to kill so many people so quickly, but guns are not nearly the only things capable of doing that.

I know standing up for guns isn’t a risky position in this part of Southern Oklahoma, but it’s insane to me that it’s even debated.

The AR-15 isn’t the perfect hunting rifle, but it could be just what you need to survive if you’re hunting and you run into a bear or a mountain lion. When it comes to defending your home, there are few options better in my opinion.

Show someone a picture of a semiauto Browning .308 and they will accept it as a hunting rifle, yet it accomplishes all the same tasks.  The Browning .308’s round is far larger than the AR, but because it doesn’t have the AR’s modern design, it doesn’t draw as much fear or attention.

Neither the Browning .308 or the AR-15 are assault rifles. AR does not stand for “assault rifle.” It stands for “ArmaLite rifle,” after its first designer. For podcast fans, you can listen to podcasts on more than just an iPod now.

The AR-15 was designed to shoot bullets, just like every other gun. It was not designed for the sole purpose of killing people.

Has it killed people? Yes, but so has cholesterol. Nobody’s legislating eggs. Well, to my knowledge. I guess I wouldn’t be surprised if they were. I am not supportive of this effort to legislate away all of society’s problems.

While many politicians will use this issue to attain or retain their political seats, remember that no law against guns will protect you from the sadists among us. There are hundreds of millions of guns in this country.

While legislation could be passed to remove guns of one kind or another, that will only take them away from the people who have invested their time and money to acquire and utilize these tools appropriately.

Many are improperly registered, stolen or attained through other criminal enterprise. These guns cannot be removed from the populace because there is no tracking them.

We would have to wait, as a society, for the weapons to be used- by criminals- before they could be located and gathered. Personally, I don’t want to make every law-abiding citizen a sitting duck just to accomplish something that won’t even solve the problem.

We hear plenty of national news stories about innocent people killed by guns, but you don’t hear about the other hundreds of millions of guns that are used only responsibly, and often to save lives.

Guns are in the hands of responsible owners far more than they are assailants.

There are more than a few Oklahomans you can research to support this including Sarah McKinley, Donna Jackson and Kendra St. Clair. These are all women who were attacked in their homes. Each of them solved their given situation with firearms. All of the intruders were men. Could these women have stopped the intruders with sharp objects or blunt force? Maybe.

St. Clair was 12 at the time, home alone, and had never fired a gun before. To her credit, she nailed the guy. She started out batting a thousand.

Legislators talk about limiting ammo capacity. Say St. Clair misses, how many shots do you think she should be allowed to fire to protect herself? How many shots does she deserve before she’s left at the will of a man breaking into her home?

To survive, should she be required to efficiently operate a bolt action weapon? Lever action?

Outlawing guns will not make this country any safer.

If you get rid of guns and knives, that will just lead to more spoon stabbings. If you’re going to kill me, by all means, please use a gun. I don’t want to die in some sort of weird cheese grater fight.

The world is a dangerous place. It always has been, it always will be and I’m okay with that. You can pad the world as thick as you want, but for some reason, there will always be losers out there mad at how well you padded your part.

Leave a Comment