Intellectual Ammunition Series. Mythology v Facts of Gun Control. Parts 1-3 This ACU Show consists of parts 1-3 of this series. Part 1- Intellectual Ammunition Pt 1: Mythology v Facts of 'Gun Control' To watch the video visit- https://youtu.be/kw7XApwSI38 MRCTV https://www.mrctv.org/blog/beneath-ve... In a new series of specially written pieces for readers and viewers of MRCTV, we will be looking at some of the biggest and most controversial issues of our time, stripping away the day-to-day "us versus them" surface images, and getting down to important facts, history, and principles that you can carry with you. Published on Nov 8, 2018   Part 2- Intellectual Ammunition Pt 2: The Constitution and Founders To watch the video of part 2 visit- https://youtu.be/W10YS7OEk0U MRCTV #2A https://www.mrctv.org/blog/beneath-ve... In this second part of our deeper look at the "Gun Control" arguments, we study the wording of the US Constitution, and explore what the Founders believed about the right keep and bear arms.   Intellectual Ammunition Pt 3: Armed with Logic and A Mistake by SCOTUS. To watch the video of part 3 visit- https://youtu.be/f3OGnQv0Q1I MRCTV https://www.mrctv.org/blog/beneath-ve... The logical conclusion is that promoters of “gun control” employ threats of gun violence against innocent, non-violent people. This is irrefutable and axiomatic. ---------------------------------------------------------------------     Intellectual Ammunition Pt 1: Mythology v Facts of 'Gun Control' Contemporary political issues come at us so rapidly, it’s easy to get lost in the polar, “us versus them” impulse, so we at MRCTV have decided to take certain hot-button issues and peel away the veneer, to expose or derive the long-standing facts, history, and principles beneath the ever-changing winds of political expediency. We begin with the popular euphemism “gun control”, which is a dangerous misnomer and actually attacks history, morals, ethics, and facts. We hope you enjoy these extended explorations, and find them very valuable... "Gun Control." The term itself is prejudiced, and doesn’t allow for honest debate. It frames things within the comforting notion of “control”. So, for example, protesters and politicians hold rallies calling for “sensible gun control”. We’ve seen it with the March for Our Lives rallies begun by a group of students from Parkland, Florida. They received mountains of attention and nary a worthwhile question from the dinosaur leftist pop media, and the ideological approach was that those who “oppose” their so-called “sensible” or “common sense” gun “controls” are cold-hearted, likely bigoted, reckless troglodytes who simply don’t understand”: The glowing, safer future that society will achieve if their “reasonable” gun “control” statutes are applied to you and your family, and, The dangers guns and “gun culture” pose to innocent people. But let’s study these in practical terms before analyzing them on deeper, long-standing principled levels. Erroneous Assumption One: Gun Statutes Lower Violent Crime First, the “gun control” argument assumes that “firearm-limiting” statutes actually work to stop school attacks and violent crime. As I noted recently for MRCTV, anti-gunners such as Dianne Feinstein conveniently overlook the fact that school shooters intent on breaking the statutes against harming others are – shock – not stopped by other statutes prohibiting legal ownership of guns or ammo, or dictating useless and often dangerous-to-civilians “waiting periods”. As I observed when Feinstein spuriously implied that gun prohibitions would stop school shootings: (G)un control laws and law ‘enforcement’ did not prevent many of the worst school shootings, such as the attack on students in Newtown Connecticut, and the attack on students in Parkland, Florida, and egregiously anti-rights gun restrictions didn’t stop a shooting a few months ago in her own neck of the woods near DC, Great Mills High School, in Maryland. Stephen