Normally, I try to stay away from complicated and political issues. I get that my opinion of a matter isn't going to change the opinion of someone who thinks differently, and that's OK by me. One opinion doesn't invalidate another. I think if more people shared that thought the world would be a more civil place both online and in person. That being said, the genre of rock seems to be in overdrive sharing their opinions across the industry, and since I'm famous for having unpopular opinions, I guess I'll waste 250 words sharing mine.

It seems that every time the anti-gun crowd is blessed with an opportunity to capitalize on a tragedy, they pounce. I get it, you have to strike while the iron is hot. It's understandable. The topic for the last decade has been the modern AR-15 rifle and what they've deemed other "assault rifles." I'm not going to waste your time by trying to correct and incorrect term, that's an argument that has been boiling for forty years and it probably isn't going to cease... but since so many toss out thoughts like "Our founders meant muskets, nobody needs an AR-15," I thought I'd share my thoughts on why the modern AR-15 rifle is the modern day musket.

Looking back at the shared history of our country, the founding of this country, and the words our founders specifically used to ensure our rights as citizens, of course they were ensuring the right to keep and bear muskets should be held to the highest constitutional standard. What some people tend to forget is just what a musket is. We look at the weapon that won our independence now as an archaic piece of long forgotten useless antiquated technology. It loaded from the muzzle simple lead shot with a prime of black powder that a very highly trained individual could use to maybe squeeze out five shots per minute with. They're antiques, so how does it translate to the modern firearms of today? I'll tell you.

When your Bill of Rights was written, and your right to keep and bear arms was solidified for the life of our country, the musket was the absolute deadliest weapon in the world at that moment in time. I'm quite sure our founding fathers could never envision a world of war that included dropping satellite guided bombs from drone planes that could effectively wage war without endangering a pilot, but the absolutely knew eventually new technology would come about for warfare. These are the same people that developed the submarine to bomb British ships. They also developed the rifle barrel to extend the range of a sniper three times further than a musket.

Those revolutionary weapons were extremely accurate in the correct hands and devastating on the loud end of it. If you've never seen the damage a musket can do, it's far more than modern ammunition thanks to nerfing agreements through organizations like NATO. The slow moving heavy loads of our founding can transfer far more energy than fast moving light loads we know today. It was common that limbs would either be blown clean off with a single shot, or would require grim battlefield amputations that often meant a battle with infection.

Why in the world would our founders guarantee such a deadly and modern weapon be available to the citizens of this country? It's because that (at that time) ultra-modern pinnacle of technology firearm was used to free a people from the tyranny of a government that tried to disarm them. It makes sense that this is the reason that right is so openly written. It's not a right to visit the gun range and have an enjoyable afternoon of punching paper. It's not so people could harvest food in the form of hunting. It was so the people could have a way to fight back at a government with equal armaments.

Some people like to point out the "militia" portion of that sentence too, but fail to realize what a militia is. In the time it was written, the militia was a collection of non-military citizens who stood and fought the same enemy. These people were farmers, preachers, shop keepers, school age boys all volunteering to fight, of their own volition, the common enemy of the military.

That right and the sheer number of citizens exercising that right is, for all we know, the reason why America has never been successfully invaded. Spain tried and failed. The French tried and failed. Mexico tried and failed. Japan really thought long and hard about it but ultimately knew they would fail, and the reason is, the gun owning American people represent the largest militia and/or military on this planet all because our founding fathers secured our rights to be armed with the comparable weaponry. If they had meant "muskets," I'm confident they would have written it.

To argue that one gun is more deadly than another is ridiculous. Each has the ability to kill whether through firing a bullet or a poor Taurus owner having to result to bludgeoning their victim to death with a crappy, faulty gun. What makes them all different is the hands that hold them. One thing most people don't realize is how much gun owners and anti-gunners have in common. Nobody wants to see firearms in the hands of someone who would commit evil crimes against another. That's why a lot of gun owners own guns. They're just as interested in a solution to evil, but realize that additional laws do little to prevent the horrible acts of someone who's already breaking the law. Otherwise, things like murder and rape wouldn't happen since it's already against the law.

LOOK: Famous Historic Homes in Every State