Guest Columns
Gun Control, Myth or Fantasy
The prayers of all good Americans go out to the innocent victims and their families that had to deal with the horror perpetrated by an act of a deranged person in Newtown, Ct. Sadly, these and other acts of violence are taking place every day. And gun control will not stop them.
Gun Control v. Knife Control
Most Americans are unaware that on the same day as the horrific attack in Newtown, another deranged lunatic in China attacked 33 primary school children, wounding 22 and two adults. With a knife. And that was not an isolated incident. China experienced a wave of knife and hatchet attacks in 2010. Thereafter they mandated all citizens register with national ID cards when purchasing large knives. Does that in anyway ease the pain or excuse the acts? God forbid! But it does show that all the legislation in the world will never stops the insane and the evil.
We are rightfully outraged by the recent events in Newtown. But where’s the outcry over the 3000 babies in the United States that are torn apart in pieces by butchers in “slaughter houses” known as abortion (clinics) mills every single day? Oh, I guess that’s acceptable population control. The unnecessary taking of any life is a blot on our society. Abortion has become acceptable. Euthanasia has become acceptable, and our legislators have forgotten that the most fundamental responsibility of government is to protect life. Certain lives in this country, as well as others, are no longer of any importance. Government has established that in certain situations we have the right to choose which life is important and which isn’t.
The youth of today have become desensitized. This is partly due to Hollywood that produces the most violent movies. Add the electronic industry that puts out games that glorify violence and carnage. Our so-called “Media” has come under the control of the progressive Marxists, and unconscionable politicians and judges who will sell their souls for thirty pieces of silver.
I also blame the clergy that have remained silent, tickling the ears of their congregations not to make waves. Well it’s time for a tsunami to be stirred up in every pulpit, at every political club meeting. It’s time for strict laws that punish the criminal, with hard labor for using a weapon in the commission of a crime. It’s time again, for an eye for an eye, and not meaningless legislation that only affects the honest and law abiding citizen.
Americans must become aware of a larger issue and consider the consequences, before rushing to rash conclusions on gun control that will result in the loss of our freedom. Yes, I said “freedom.” The progressive will use this despicable act that could precipitate in the loss of our freedoms. Not just the right to “keep and bear arms” that assures all other freedoms and especially the God given right to protect ourselves and our families but most importantly every other freedom granted by our Constitution that we have enjoyed for over two hundred years.
Exploiting Tragedy
The tragedy of Newtown has now become an incident to further the agenda of the Marxist left. Remember the words of a past Democrat Chief of Staff “You never want a serious crisis go to waste.” So once again, the progressive Democrat Marxists are exploiting this tragedy to meet their goal to disarm the American people.
Even before this tragedy it is important to note that reports surfaced that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D) had laid the groundwork for a draconian ban on all so-called “assault weapons.” At the same time the State Department reopened discussions on the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty. And, let’s not dismiss the self-hating Jewish Billionaire madman, Michael Bloomberg, who stepped up his crusade to ban all firearms. In short, do away with the Second Amendment. Why should he worry? He’s surround by heavily armed body guards, if fact, he publicly suggested that the 50,000 man NYC police force was his army. One has to wonder whether this moronic demigod has any recollection of the Holocaust, especially in a world today that has become more anti-Semitic.
Do the Words “Change” and “Forward” Ring a Bell?
Do the words of Obama’s slogans in 2008: “Change” and in this 2012: “Forward” sound familiar? They should. Every low life Communist/socialist dictator used these same slogans. After coming to power, the first thing they did was disarm their people. So what are some of the results of disarming the people, genocide?
Every government that has confiscated the firearms of their people has gone on to the systematic slaughter of their people, followed by the takeover by sick demented leaders. Russia: estimated genocide of 60,000,000 plus; China: 36,000,000; Nazi-Germany: 21,000,000; Cambodia: 6,000,000; not to mention Armenia, Serbia, Bosnia, Uganda, Congo, Sudan, Katanga. A genocide is taking place as I write this article in South Africa of white farmers that mirrors what took place in Rhodesia. I could go on, but you’ve got the picture.
And please, all you bleeding heart liberals, don’t try and tell me we live in America in a free society and things like that could never take place here. No, all one has to do is look at the dismantling of the United States Constitution over the last 40 years – especially under the lawless dictatorship of the Obama Administration that has stripped away at the Constitution and legislate through executive orders and a health-care bill that has nothing to do with health-care. If fact, included in that illegal “Act”, Obama has the right to create his own army, and he is given free rein to ignore the Posse Comitatus” Act..
I pray the reader will question, why did the criminal Obama Administration Department of Justice illegally sell automatic weapons including machine guns to the Mexican Drug Cartels’ that resulted in thousands of deaths including an American. Yet, there was no outcry by the media stooges or Congress of any significance. Why does this progressive regime refuse to adhere to the laws and statutes of the United States and repeatedly usurp the Constitution through Executive orders? Why does this Administration repeatedly release Islamic terrorists and supply weapons to violent despotic radical Islamic groups?
All the legislation created or to be put forth will not deter psychopaths from carry out their demonic schemes. What it will do is strip good people of their ability to protect themselves and their families leaving them at the mercy of gangs, lunatics, and most assuredly the tyrannical sociopath occupying the oval office who would be the Dictator Supreme. The only safeguard to our freedom and liberty is for all Americans to have weapons. James Madison reminds us:
The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation.
Lest we forget!
How Actually to Solve the Problem
The US Constitution. Photo: National Archives of the United States
The only meaningful legislation would be for every state to allow all Americans without a criminal record the right to carry concealed weapons, which is a right set forth by the Second Amendment. Allow those teachers and/or principals to carry while on duty on request. It may be the only sure-fire way to protect those under their charge. If the principal or even one teacher were armed many of those children may be alive today to enjoy Christmas or Hanukkah.
The anti-gun wackos want us to believe with more gun control there will be less crime. All the statistics prove that more firearms in the hands of the people results in less crime. But their allies in the progressive Marxist press will never tell you that over 2,000,000 plus crimes are stopped each year by armed citizens.
Since when did any criminal obey any gun legislation? One just has look at what is taking place in cities with the strictest gun laws: Washington, D.C., Chicago, Trenton, Camden, Philadelphia, LA, and New York. Where evil prevails, the miscreant’s will be with us always. Why would any honest, freedom loving American politician aid and abet the criminal element of our society by disarming those who believe in the laws, morals and virtue? In short, they’re sacrificing the lives of the sheep on the alters of rabid wolves.
The sociopath in the White House and his minions in the Democrat Marxist Party would have you believe that the Second Amendment does not mean what it says:
… the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
I remind all those that would infringe on our rights, the Second Amendment is positive law!
Before you trample on our rights, you will first have to amend the Constitution, and before you do that, be sure you think very hard, you may be kindling the flames of a second revolution that you cannot hope to win. The English attempted to confiscate the arms and powder at Lexington, they did not succeed and neither will you despite your purchasing of millions of rounds of ammunition and arming every bureaucracy in Washington. And your young twerps you’re training as part of AmeriCorps to be attached to the DHS have never seen the wrath of people when pushed into a corner.
Right will always prevail over might, so do what you will at your own peril. This is the greatest nation on the face of the earth and we won’t let you destroy the hope of the civilized world. Nor will we ever let you deny our God, regardless of any legislation or ruling from some Hoodlums in Black Robes. That being said, Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah.
God Bless America
The Eagle
[subscribe2]
-
Clergy4 days agoFaith alone will save the country
-
Civilization1 day agoElon Musk, Big Game RINO Hunter
-
Civilization5 days agoFreewheeling Transparency: Trump Holds First Post-Election News Conference
-
Civilization5 days agoDr. Jay Bhattacharya Will Rebuild Trust in Public Health
-
Civilization3 days agoLegacy media don’t get it
-
Constitution16 hours agoBiden as Feeble Joe – now they tell us
-
Executive2 days agoWaste of the Day: Mismanagement Plagues $50 Billion Opioid Settlement
-
Civilization2 days agoA Sometimes-Squabbling Conservative Constellation Gathers at Charlie Kirk Invitation
“All the statistics prove that more firearms in the hands of the people results in less crime.”
Then why does the USA have a far higher rate of gun murders than EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY IN WESTERN AND CENTRAL EUROPE?? You have a higher murder rate than ALBANIA, for f***’s sake!
Even an idiot can see that firearms in the hands of mad people like Nancy Lanza and her vile son do not reduce crimes. What they do is let mad people kill lots of other people really, really easily. I am a strong supporter of private gun ownership, but in the same way as I am a strong supporter of private vehicle ownership – guns, like cars, should be available only to people who are fit to own them and competent in their use. Criminal record? No guns. Mentally ill person in the house? No guns. Untrained? No guns. Sane, law-abiding and able to pass a test in safe weapon handling and firearms law? All the guns you like. It isn’t actually difficult. That’s how things work in Germany and guess what? Our rate of firearms homicide is ONE FIFTEENTH of yours.
Because evil men are going to get those weapons, law or no law.
“Because evil men are going to get those weapons, law or no law.”
The problem isn’t evil men; it’s disturbed men (and women, and boys.) Sure, professional criminals will get guns, although in the UK they’ve mostly been reduced to converted 9mm gas pistols or blank firers. Professional criminals aren’t carrying out school shootings, though. That’s the province of Mummy’s boys who don’t get on with other children, torture their hamster and spend all day taking photos of themselves wearing black and posing with their mother’s gun collection – in short, people that a proper licensing system would not allow to own firearms!
“The only safeguard to our freedom and liberty is for all Americans to have weapons.”
Including Americans like Adam Lanza? Please tell me you’re not serious.
Put it this way: the only sure defense against Adam Lanza with a gun, is you with a gun. Or whoever he tries to get into his sights.
You either trust the people, or you oppress the people. There’s no middle ground.
“the only sure defense against Adam Lanza with a gun, is you with a gun. Or whoever he tries to get into his sights.”
I spent 14 years in the Army. I was a Skill At Arms instructor and shot for my unit team (rifle, pistol and light machinegun.) I am, quite frankly, awesome with a pistol. If Adam Lanza – a cellar-dwelling geek – attacked me with an assault rifle and all I had was a handgun, he would probably kill me. He’d probably kill you. He’d probably kill ANYONE. A pistol is no match for an assault weapon. You know how often a normally trained soldier in COMBAT conditions – not on the range – can hit someone ten metres away with the 13 rounds in the magazine of his Browning Hi-Power? Two. A teacher? Forget it.
“In short, they’re sacrificing the lives of the sheep on the alters of rabid wolves.”
Whereas you are happy to sacrifice the lives of children so that demented sad cases can continue to masturbate over compeltely inappropriate weapons. Why does someone like Nancy Lanza need an M4 clone? It’s useless for hunting – not even legal for deer in most states. It’s a poor target rifle, short-barrelled and with the sight line far too high above the bore line. It’s a bafflingly stupid choice for “home defence;” unless you actually have military training the only sensible home defence gun is a pump-action shotgun, because you’re not competent to use anything else and it would probably be too dangerous anyway.
All that this moronic woman’s right to play Rambo has achieved is her own death, the murders of 26 innocent people and the suicide of her disgusting son. Do you think it was worth the price? I don’t.
Nope. We’re happy to make sure the prospective targets can get their own hands on a gun. If the headmistress and her associates had been armed, they could with one bullet among them have stopped Adam Lanza before he could squeeze off one more round beyond what he fired to get into the building.
That’s assuming, BTW, that Adam Lanza really was the sole actor. I’ve seen a lot of reports that maybe he had help. Or maybe not so much help, as a couple of handlers who shot him with one of the weapons he/they stole from his mother, threw those weapons down to make it look like suicide, then bolted into the woods.
I’m not saying that I have any more corroboration than these fragmentary reports that purport to be from eyewitnesses. But I’ll tell you this: that these incidents should occur while the UN Arms Trade Treaty is up for negotiation strikes me funny.
In case you’re wondering who said that, it was Ian Fleming.
“We’re happy to make sure the prospective targets can get their own hands on a gun.”
So what? Using a gun to defend yourself is very far from easy, even for a trained professional; after all, in every engagement between trained soldiers one unit tries to defend themselves with guns and fails. My faith in the ability of untrained teachers to protect a school against a loony with an assault rifle is round about zero.
“If the headmistress and her associates had been armed, they could with one bullet among them have stopped Adam Lanza before he could squeeze off one more round beyond what he fired to get into the building.”
They COULD have. Except, back in the real world, they’d have missed him with a couple of panicky rounds then got killed anyway.
“I’m not saying that I have any more corroboration than these fragmentary reports that purport to be from eyewitnesses.”
There are plenty reports that purport to be from eyewitnesses. Some crackpots are even blaming Israeli agents, apparently on the grounds that the Barack And Bibi Show hasn’t been a big hit.
“that these incidents should occur while the UN Arms Trade Treaty is up for negotiation strikes me funny.”
Why? I don’t see a connection.
“In case you’re wondering who said that, it was Ian Fleming.”
Actually it was one of his fictional characters, Auric Goldfinger. I’ve read the book.
Putting aside the conspiracy nonsense about the U.N. – I understand the impulse to arm teachers, but do you really think a panicked civilian returning fire in a building full of running children will IMPROVE the situation?
First, the aim of the UN at one-world government is not “nonsense.” Their very name implies it. We’re only arguing over whether they are serious in their purpose, or else are hopelessly inept and are only interested in skimming off the top of member States’ dues payments. Either way, that is the sort of thing up with which we ought not put. (With apologies to Sir Winston Churchill.)
Except that I know that enough of them at the UN are very serious. One word, and one number, shall suffice. The word is “Agenda” and the number is Twenty-one.
Second, a “civilian” (meaning one not in the regular pay of the government to enforce the law) having a gun and knowing he might have to use it (in the case of a headmaster/mistress and his/her staff) would not “panic.”
Third: yes, a member of the target class returning fire at the assailant would improve the situation.
Fourth: this sounds like a cliché, but: have you any better idea?
Let me answer that fourth question for you. Your idea is that no person, save a law-enforcement officer or an active-duty military service member, shall own or even so much as touch a gun. Any “civilian” (your word) violating that dictum shall be guilty of a felony, and upon conviction thereof be subject to fine, imprisonment, or both.
I half expect you to protest my guess at your motive. Protest away. I give you the logical endpoint of your thinking, after making appropriate deductions and inductions from your tone.
“With apologies to Sir Winston Churchill.”
Um, you mean the same Sir Winston Churchill who was instrumental in setting up the UN, as a coalition against Hitler?
“The word is “Agenda” and the number is Twenty-one.”
And the concept is “hysterical over-reaction.”
“a “civilian” (meaning one not in the regular pay of the government to enforce the law) having a gun and knowing he might have to use it (in the case of a headmaster/mistress and his/her staff) would not “panic.””
Bet they would. A large percentage of trained soldiers panic when they come under fire. Why do you think civilians would perform better than someone who’s been trained for combat and conditioned by repeated exposure to battle simulations, overhead fire guns and all the military’s other little tricks for preparing its members for combat?
“Third: yes, a member of the target class returning fire at the assailant would improve the situation.”
If you regard a circular firing squad as an improvement, yes.
“have you any better idea?”
Absolutely. Ensure that nobody who is mentally ill, a convicted criminal or not demonstrably competent in skill at arms owns a gun. That’s how it works in Germany, and the difference in firearms-related deaths suggests that it works a good deal better than your system does.
Agenda 21 is as real as a slap in the face. I’ve seen the documents, both at the UN’s present site and in the Wayback Machine.
I reject your assumptions. And I’m about to publish another article containing evidence against them.
Your last proposal for “ensuring” that “only the right people have guns” is impossible. It is fantasy.
“Agenda 21 is as real as a slap in the face.”
It’s real, yes. But, like the arms trade treaty, it doesn’t say what you think it does.
“I reject your assumptions. And I’m about to publish another article containing evidence against them.”
If you’re talking about combat stress they’re not assumptions. They’re facts.
“Your last proposal for “ensuring” that “only the right people have guns” is impossible. It is fantasy.”
It works in every other civilised country. That’s why the USA is the one with the aberrant gun death statistics; your system DOESN’T work.
Works how? I have only your word on that. I say that it doesn’t work nearly as well as you say. I cite the Norway Incident. How well did being gun-free work there?
I think you’re working with rigged figures.
Michael Alan Kline Sr liked this on Facebook.
Ted Foster liked this on Facebook.