Federal rifle legislation has allowed America's Democrat (and some neo-con and other RINO) gun-grabbers to create the myth that the Second Amendment bans citizens from owning weapons of war.  This myth arises from the way Democrats use America's existing weapons legislation.

An "assault rifle" is a type of gun invented around WWII and common thereafter.  It is a light, handheld rifle with a selective fire capability that allows its user to shoot it in fully automatic mode (several rounds fired consecutively with a single pull of the trigger, without reloading in between the shots) and in semi-automatic mode (only one round fired with a single pull of the trigger, without reloading between the shots).

Even before these potentially fully automatic rifles, the National Firearm Act (NFA) of 1934 controlled "machine guns" —  controls extended, in 1968, with the Gun Control Act and, in 1986, with the Firearm Owners Protection Act.  Under the NFA, it is illegal for any private civilian to own any fully automatic weapon.

Some legal experts have considered the NFA's constitutionality controversial, even as amended in 1968.  Still, that it generally prohibited law-abiding civilians from having firearms with fully automatic fire capability was, arguably, only a relatively minor and well defined restriction.  The NFA's more far-reaching consequence was that it created, out of thin air, an excuse for many politicians to claim there is no lawful reason for civilians to have "military" weapons.

Contrary to leftist ideologues' repeated claims, that conclusion had no factual basis in 1791, when the Second Amendment was ratified, guaranteeing private civilians the right to possess the very same pistols and rifles that were commonly used by the modern military, thus giving the armed citizenry firepower similar to that of a standing army.  (Some private civilians did in fact lawfully possess cannons at that time.)

Image: Contrary to what Democrats will tell you, this is not an AR-15 (PK Machine gun).

That actual military rifles with selective fire capacity have been banned for private, civilian possession and ownership for many decades now has not stopped Democrats from pushing for more bans and using deceptive rhetoric to do so.  They have smuggled into the discourse a different definition of an assault rifle to mean a semi-automatic firearm, with a detachable magazine, that has no selective fire capability but resembles an actual assault rifle based on its superficial features, such as a protruding pistol grip, barrel shroud, etc.

Democrats have done so to deceive the American public into believing that firearms that look scary or "military-like" have no lawful purpose in private civilian hands and should be banned.  (Never mind that doing so would violate the Second Amendment principles set out in District of Columbia v. Heller.)

So why this leftist charade about scary but legal and constitutional semi-automatic rifles?  The answer is easy to guess: leftists want to disarm law-abiding citizens completely rather than just keep fully automatic weapons away from them.  Calling popular semi-automatic rifles "assault rifles" makes it easier for leftists to accomplish that goal.

Most likely, leftists feel uncomfortable governing a country that allows armed citizens.  Moreover, many of them seem to believe that the government has, or should have, a strict monopoly on using violence to defend citizens' lives.  They must sense, too, that We the People may try to resist our disarmament if we realize that the main goal is to complete a free citizenry's subordination to total government.  And that brings up this obvious conclusion: because the liberals resort to deception to accomplish their objectives, it stands to a reason that they must not be trusted.

If one assumes they are lying about their motives for demonizing legitimate constitutional weapons, we must not be stupid enough to fall for this deception.  If we aren't smart, leftists will be able to disarm us, control us, deprive us of our fundamental right to self-defense, and confiscate some or all fruits of our hard work and ingenuity as they please.

Please remember that our guns are the only things of consequence that stand between America, with the unprecedented freedom that she offers to common people, and the Soviet-type totalitarian system leftists advocate (although all for our own good, of course).  Once we lose our Second Amendment rights, our other constitutional rights will become indefensible, and the Soviet Union 2.0 — or something equally bad — will be imposed on us right here in America.

UPDATE: A reader was kind enough to inform us that it is legal in some states to own a fully automatic weapon, although the process is difficult and expensive. 

Mark Andrew Dwyer's recent columns are posted at The Federal Observer and Canada Free Press.  Links to his other commentaries can be found here.