A rebuttal to the illogic of Joe Biden

Joe Biden recently said in an interview that he told his wife, "If there ever is a problem, take your double barrel shotgun out on the porch, and fire off 2 rounds, and trust me, you won't have to worry about your safety."

Where do I start with the stupidity of this statement? I'll start here: Biden lives in the country, doing so in the city will get you immediately arrested. Honestly, since he lives in Delaware, if his wife took his advice she'd be charged with a felony (I guess he must not love her too much to want to see her in prison). Second, if there was someone approaching, saw that she had a double barrel, and she just emptied both barrels, they would know she was empty, and could attack as she either fumbled to reload, or simply the sad realization she is out of shells and is know holding a club.

He went on to say that an AR-15 is much more difficult to fire and operate, particularly for women. Moronic statement. Aside from the patronizing and insulting advice to "little women" whom he presumes to be incapable of handling an AR-15, the AR-15 has multiple advantages as a home defense weapon over a shotgun. I speak from experience: I have taught for years in personal and home defense, I am a retired tactical unit officer, and private owner of these weapons for twenty years.

Advantages to the AR-15 for home defense are many. One such reason is accuracy. A shotgun is nearly useless in a hostage situation, we would never perform an assault as a tactical unit with shotguns alone for this very reason, a shotgun has great firepower, but it all depends on the load of the shell, and even the rifled slug is not of acceptable accuracy when better alternatives are available. An AR-15, in many different calibers, is especially effective in a building such as a home for hostage situations. Have you ever shot a twelve gauge, loaded with 3 inch magnum buckshot, back to back with an AR-15? If you do, you will immediately notice the lack of recoil of the AR in comparison. It is not only far more accurate as a first shot hostage taker elimination round, but follow up shots are quick and easy, even on the move.

AR-15s are not difficult to operate (especially as this condescending sexist pig implied toward women, who not only serve in law enforcement, tactical units, and are int the military, such as my daughter, that they aren't capable of thinking of their own defense under pressure!), are lighter, have far less recoil (as I mentioned previously), are far more accurate, and are simple to work with. As with ALL firearms, it takes time and practice to be proficient.

An AR-15 is my primary home defense weapon. Why? For the reason listed above and more. Bad guys come in groups, well armed, and wear body armor at times. The AR-15 can defeat these. Why do we need high capacity magazines? We don't know what the bad guys will have, how many there will be, and I guarantee, that even I, and other highly trained weapons experts can miss in the real world with adrenaline flowing and shots being fired.

This article is not going to postulate on handguns, I will save that for another time, but I will say this: as a weapon, even as an officer on the street, when an armed confrontation is likely, it should always be the weapon of last resort. A shotgun is a wonderful weapon in very particular and limited applications. If you live alone, have no one but yourself to watch out for, and you can guarantee there is one intruder that you can identify and eliminate. The spread of buckshot means you won't miss your target inside a home, but if there are other people in the house, and they are your family, if they are in the vicinity, you CANNOT fire and be sure you won't hit the wrong person with one of those pieces of shot. The limited number of rounds always eliminates it as my first option in any situation anyway.

Lastly, the trump card of all of this is the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment was to quote Thomas Jefferson (and while I quote Thomas Jefferson, all of the Constitutional Framers echoed this statement), "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." He goes on to say, “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

Moreover, quoting Cesare Beccaria, "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they (the Government ) try to take it."

Trust me my friends, when they come, they don't want you to have assault weapons, because that is what they will be bringing, and the beauty of that, is the Founding Father's meant for us to able to meet the unlawful attack of our government on equal ground. They knew full well this day would likely come, and that is why I am against ALL of the proposed gun talks at all. The government, if it has no tyrannical desires, never needs to know what I have at home to protect my home, my family, and my life.

This government has tyrannical desires, but they cannot carry them out if they do not first disarm us. They realize that if we the people are willing to fight and die by the millions as free citizens rather than become subjects like the people under Adolph Hitler, they cannot win, for the whole nation will be destroyed. Ultimately, they must back down if they see our resolve, which is why I implore you to either speak out, or share this writing. They MUST know, because if they do, we can win without a shot ever being fired, and that should be the goal of every patriot.


~ Steve J., guest blogger