On the subject of gun-control, it should be understood that no such thing exists. Were our population to be disarmed there’d have to be costumed thugs with guns walking the streets and initiating force against others in an effort to disarm them. Then, those thugs would be the only ones with guns. This is not gun-control; this is propping up one side of the playing-field. This is livestock-control. Certainly the frightening statistics are out there, the ominous rhetoric is thick, the politicos are posturing at their pulpits, and the concept of gun-control has been given a nice, big, shiny wrapper and has been set in front of us. Don’t let the wrapper fool you.
It should also be understood that the majority of Americans are led by their noses these days regarding how to think about important issues. The government deviously supports their agendas by bringing specifically selected issues to the forefront of our communities through corrupted media. Remember, we get the story last; we aren’t getting the full story. It seems such common knowledge today that the news is overwhelmed with bias, and that the stories are completely molded by the time they reach us in an effort to push the agendas of those in power. It’s as if everyone already knows they can’t trust these sources, but there aren’t any honest options so we listen to compromised material anyway.
I know that people don’t generally go about their daily routines toting pistols and stashing rifles in the cabs of their vehicles. I’d even venture to guess that if most folks were to be mugged/raped/beaten/etc they would probably not succumb to paranoia and begin doing so. However, people really ought to have the option regardless of whether they’ve been assaulted before or not.
Here is a mental exercise that illustrates this point. Start by thinking about your loved ones, or one person who really matters to you in particular and picture them in all their splendor.
Now that your loved ones are on your mind, imagine watching an intruder enter your home and seeing your loved ones being sexually assaulted in front of you and then being executed while screaming for help; in this scenario you have been overpowered and restrained and have no control, because you didn’t care enough about your children, wife, friends, etc to arm yourself against this intruder. In all honesty it takes a few hundred bucks initially, and then the price of ammo and 1 hour of your time per month spent maintaining the ability to effectively use your firearm in order to significantly bolster your home defense.
Okay, that was pretty dramatic. So, now imagine its just little ol’ you sitting in your small business that you opened and built up over the years…or maybe you’re on your way to the bank and you’re just starting up a small business, and you’re carrying a large sum of money to deposit. That money is your livelihood. That is what you have worked hard for up to this point in your life; it’s what you’ll use for food, rent, clothes, etc. Now imagine an armed criminal forcing you to hand it to them…this is not right. In case there is any question in your mind about it, put yourself in the shoes of a father or mother or grandparent or anyone who has worked terrifically hard over the their lifetime to provide for their family, but are now forced to provide nothing because they are unable to defend themselves sufficiently.
Still too dramatic? Couldn’t happen to you? Doesn’t happen enough for you to worry about it? …Delusional about the world we live in?
School shootings should raise awareness that high value for human life is not being effectively passed on to the newest generations. It should raise questions about the unlevel playing field we live in as unarmed citizens. Instead, fools have somehow been convinced that these massacres occur, because citizens are too well armed and too well trained; these nutty sheep want to disarm the population.
Regardless of the school shootings, movie-theater blowouts, and other situations in which a single armed citizen could have prevented mass losses of life, there are other equally legitimate reasons why American citizens not only have the right to, but, in fact, ought to arm themselves. It’s the government, folks!
It’s Big Brother, Uncle Sam, the DoD, IRS, DEA, and their cohorts. I recently heard John Stuart stating that, because the U.S. is not currently on the brink of military takeover, Americans needn’t worry about being forcibly disarmed. The perspective that Stuart isn’t including in his quippy commentary is that of the long-run. When America’s citizens are no longer allowed to stay armed sufficiently, when they no longer maintain their ability to defend their communities from their rulers’ standing military forces, they stop being citizens and become subjects. They are thereby subject to whatever actions their government takes toward them. (One example of a disarmed nation was Nazi Germany) Of course, I don’t think Obama is going to turn the military against the U.S. public; he has only 3 years left in office. However, legislation passed today coupled with legislation passed in the future will determine when this does occur.
In the mean time the American public is the most heavily armed public in the world toting over 300,000,000 privately owned guns! Potentially, though, in thirty or forty years, when our kids are grown and firearms have been illegal for decades rendering the public defenseless and ignorant of how to use them, I foresee an issue.
The public has already allowed themselves to be outgunned in most parts of the country. Fully automatic firearms are already off limits. Because of this, the people’s only current leverage over their government is strength in numbers (and their ability to justify their existence to those in power by producing tax revenue).
This is not to suggest that everyone should join a militia or stockpile an arsenal of weapons and ammo. I’m simply suggesting folks think for themselves and decide whether they want the ability to defend themselves, their loved ones, their property, and their communities from all enemies foreign and domestic if it were to come down to it. Of course the likelihood of this being necessary hardly exists while the people are armed.
This is not about party-platforms. It is about an even playing field. The two political branches of government (executive and legislative) maintain a two-party system to keep the public distracted and divided, so their subjects won’t unite around any particular train of thought and cast out those in power. In my opinion, Tommy J. and his fellow founders would be appalled at our current owners’ strategies toward managing their tax-livestock.
Stay armed, stay aware, stay sharp, and don’t let the wrapper fool you.