Vocabulary lessons were extremely annoying in English class.  I remember the redundant words that all essentially meant the same thing.  I remember lots of sentence creating (“Pugnacious pigeons pelted Pete’s poodle with poop” was one of my most creative).  It was horrible.

But it was important.

Having a wide vocabulary is essential to any writer.  Having a thesaurus is helpful but can be time consuming.  Sometimes its more than just a time saver though.  Sometimes having the right word means everything.

In Bo Burnham’s song “Words Words Words”, the 3rd line of the song is as follows: “90 lady cops on the road and I’m arrested for doing 80”.  His use of the word “doing” is essential to the phrase because it’s interpreted in two ways.  The first way, he’s arrested for speeding, doing 80 (obviously too fast since he was arrested).  But its also intended to say that he’s being arrested for “doing” (having sex with) 80 of the 90 lady cops on the road.

His word choice throughout the song is intentional and done carefully.  Those in the media need to do the same thing.  I’ve noticed lately a lot of incorrect terms being used to describe weapons that are used in shootings.  The term “automatic rifle” is often used where “semi-automatic rifle” should be used.  There is a significant difference between the two.

An automatic rifle will continue to fire while the shooter simply holds the trigger down.  It will stop when there is no more ammunition to be fired.  A semi-automatic rifle will only fire one round of ammunition per pull of the trigger.  To shoot 10 rounds through an automatic rifle would only require the shooter hold the trigger down.  On a semi-automatic rifle it would require 10 single pulls of the trigger.  Two very different actions.

The other term I don’t like is “military-style”.  It’s used mostly by the media when talking about rifles that possess features that are also used on military weapons.  I don’t think it should be used because it makes weapons sound more powerful than they are.  While in reality, a homemade explosive sounds just as deadly to me as a “military grade explosive”.  The military isn’t powerful just because of the technology it has; significant training is also very important.

A folding stock or adjustable stock is considered a “military-style” feature and will fall under proposed assault (another term I hate but we wont go there) weapon bans.  Included in that list of features is a whole assortment of other things like “pistol grips” and tactical rails.

Just because a technology is used in the military does not make it an evil thing.  It doesn’t even mean its more powerful.  For example, look at the AK47.  The AK47 is a rifle that has seen extensive military service around the world.  AK47’s do not traditionally have an adjustable stock.  Most don’t even have tactical rails.  That in no way hinders the AK47’s power and performance.  Adjustable stocks are usually to improve the feel of the rifle to the shooter.  The same with pistol grips.  They do not make the weapon more deadly in any way, just more comfortable.

Using the logic that says guns which look like military weapons should be banned is along the same lines as saying camouflage should be banned because armies across the world also use it.  Shouldn’t that make it more deadly and evil?  I assure you millions of hunters have other ideas on the subject.  If you ban things because the military uses them, a lot of our day to day technology would be banned.

In addition there are a bunch of companies around the world, such as International Armoring Corporation, which provide armored cars to civilians.  Any entity, civilian or government, can contact these companies and have vehicles restructured to include various levels of armoring.

Vehicle armor is something most people only think about the military having.  That’s not the case anymore.  But it’s perfectly legal.  So if my “military-style” AR15 is going to be banned, why aren’t these vehicles banned?  I’m not very excited to know that anyone out there could be driving around in an armored, bullet proof car.  Not only would one devastate other vehicles in an accident, anyone could hide in one of them and be safe from even the police.

If a person or corporation wanted to, and had enough money of course, they could essentially build a fleet of tanks that look like regular vehicles.  Then, armed with their military style automatic assault weapons and camouflage  they would be unstoppable!

But me and my semi-automatic AR15 are not a threat to anyone.  Nor am I breaking any laws with my firearm use.  I am a recreational shooter who enjoys destroying those evil paper targets.  That’s all.  The media would have you believe I am a crazy with military weapons intent on gunning down people at the mall.  I waste a lot of money but that’s the only negative thing that comes from my gun ownership.

Let’s all just try to be reasonable during the next few months.  Gun owners, don’t do anything extreme to get back at the anti-gun crowd.  It’ll only make us look worse.  Anti-gun people, just give us gun owners a chance.  Sit down and talk with us.  We’re not monsters.  We would be more than happy to show you how our guns work too; understanding on both sides is important during this critical time.  There is no need to be afraid of guns or people who own them.

Let’s please resolve this issue so i can buy some more ammo . . . those paper targets are mobilizing for an attack in the next few days and all the local stores are sold out of my ammo.

Advertisements
Comments

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s