I knew it as soon as I tuned in the news on Friday morning and saw the unfolding story of the tragic shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. We were looking at another “Columbine”, possibly worse.
And like Columbine, I also knew for sure that the leftist gun ban advocates would be out dancing gleefully in the blood of the victims, before it had even dried.
“Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you couldn't do before.” - Rahm Emanuel – Obama's former White House Chief of Staff.
Sure enough, a tearful “President Mordred” was on TV the same day, claiming that this was not the time to talk about gun control, but implying that tomorrow certainly will be, while all the while his surrogates are already at it again.
This despite the facts that overall violent crime has decreased in the concealed carry states and has decreased since the “Assault Weapons Ban” expired years ago.
But those facts are ignored, for the purpose of an underlying agenda.
You see, it's as old as humanity, the propensity of tyrants to always want to disarm those they would enslave.
“Under the decree of the shogun Toyotomi Hideyoshi (1536-1598), issued on the 8th day of the seventh month, Tensho 16, "The people of the various provinces are strictly forbidden to have in their possession any swords, short swords, bows, spears, firearms, or other types of arms. The possession of unnecessary implements makes difficult the collection of taxes and dues, and tends to foment uprisings."
“To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” - George Mason ( One of the founders of the United States )
When you disarm your subjects you offend them by showing that either from cowardliness or lack of faith, you distrust them; and either conclusion will induce them to hate you. – Niccolo Machiavelli, "The Prince"
"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; what would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm those only who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty - so dear to men, so dear to the enlightened legislator - and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer? Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.. They ought to be designated as laws not preventive but fearful of crimes, produced by the impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree." --Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794), On Crimes and Punishments.
"After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military." ( My note: and the criminals ) - William S. Burroughs, 1914 – 1997
"Gun control often serves as a gateway to tyranny. Tyrants from Hitler to Mao to Stalin have sought to disarm their own citizens, for the simple reason that unarmed people are easier to control. Our Founders, having just expelled the British army, knew that the right to bear arms serves as the guardian of every other right. This is the principle so often ignored by both sides in the gun control debate. Only armed citizens can resist tyrannical government." - Ron Paul
huÆman rightsÆ,fundamental rights, esp. those believed to belong to an individual and in whose exercise a government may not interfere, as the rights to speak*, associate, work, etc.[1785-95] “- Dictionary.com UnabridgedBased on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2011. * Keep and bear arms, etc.
Make no mistake about it, the people who advocate the abolition of one of our most fundamental human rights - RKBA – the Right to Keep And Bear Arms, are absolutely tyrants. If they're not the kind of tyrants who would have the guts to try to enslave, and possibly exterminate us themselves, they would certainly do so by government proxy.
As bad as this school shooting was, and it was horrible, we must still face the fact that over a hundred million people were killed in the last century by various forms of forced-collectivism, and a very great number of them were disarmed as the precursor to it.
But of course those things didn't happen under the live magnifying glass of 24 hour TV news.
A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic. – Joseph StalinAnd if tyrants can remove your human right to keep and bear arms, they can remove all the rest, for you will be helpless to resist them after that."Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas." -- Joseph StalinThat's the man who forcibly starved millions of Ukrainians, by exporting all their food at gunpoint, to Russia, and starving them to the point where mothers were eating their own children. And they had no means to resist.So in the wake of this terrible tragedy, I really think the wrong questions are being asked. People are asking how anyone could do such a thing, why this nut case had access to guns... But sick animals have always had access to weapons throughout human history, unless and until they were identified and kept locked up. Before guns, they used knives, swords, clubs, or even rocks.The pacifists want to blame the guns, or the “easy access to them”, but in effect that's blaming the hundreds of millions of good people for what an extremely tiny minority of bad people do. And it remains besides the point.The point keeps going back to the fact that self defense, and keeping and bearing the means of doing so, is a fundamental human right, and that's what these tyrants would infringe. Plain and simple.And it gets even more fundamental than that, as explained in the book, “The Planetary Bill of Rights Project”. The derivation process is this:1.) Who owns your life? There are two choices, either you or some collective. If the collective owns it, then you are a slave of forced-collectivism and they may dispose of you and your life in any way they please. If you own it, you are a free person, and:2.) Free people have the right to defend themselves and their loved ones. Slaves do not.
Sec. 1. Be it enacted,...That no freedman, free negro or mulatto, not in the military service of the United States government, and not licensed so to do by the board of police of his or her county, shall keep or carry fire-arms of any kind, or any ammunition, dirk or bowie knife, and on conviction thereof in the county court shall be punished by fine, not exceeding ten dollars, and pay the costs of such proceedings, and all such arms or ammunition shall be forfeited to the informer; and it shall be the duty of every civil and military officer to arrest any freedman, free negro, or mulatto found with any such arms or ammunition, and cause him or her to be committed to trial in default of bail.” – The Mississippi Black Code of 1865See the point?Yes, the wrong questions are being asked in this eternal debate between advocates of liberty or slavery.We soon face a time when Israel decides that, because a nuclear-armed Iran is an existential threat to them, they must attack and destroy Iran's capability of producing nuclear weapons. If they attack, though, I doubt our Jew-hating “President Mordred” will lift a finger to help Israel. But Iran will still see the United States as an ally of Israel. ( Though I'm not sure why, the way Obama has treated them. )But it's a known fact that there are Iranian and Hamas agents in the United States and they're “sleepers” who will awaken if an attack on Iran happens, and they will be willing to martyr themselves by killing as many Americans as they can. And what better and more vulnerable place to strike, than our Victim Disarmament Zone schools?Now Israel has long understood that kind of situation. The fact is that an event like what happened at this school, could happen at ten thousand schools all over the country, in one day's time. In fact Israel has made in mandatory for many decades, that all school teachers be armed and trained to stop such attackers. Before they did that, their children were being slaughtered in their schools! They understand very well, the principle of “Call 911 and die”, that children and teachers can be slaughtered before the police ever get near a school to help them. This is exactly what just happened at Sandy Hook Elementary, as well as at Columbine.So I think we're asking exactly the wrong questions in the wake of this tragedy, and we don't have precious time to waste on bickering between free people and pacifist cowards!The questions that we really need to ask are:Why have American schools been made into Victim Disarmament Zones by our government and the people who voted that they be made this way?There's a very appropriate video that was made years ago, which is totally relevant to this:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0vyxgJLJVAThe fact is that criminals have never obeyed laws, that's why they call them criminals, and when you create a Victim Disarmament Zone, it's like putting up a big neon sign saying that criminals can have their way in that place, and do whatever they please to the victims within it.Yes, there are many good reasons why the Founders made the Second Amendment say:
the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.
"The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the "high powers" delegated directly to the citizen, and 'is excepted out of the general powers of government.' A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the law-making power." 24 Tex. 394 (1859)
"The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such only as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed or broken in upon, in the smallest degree;...any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right..." 1 Ga. 243 (1846)
And the second question that needs to be asked, after people are made to realize that Victim Disarmament Zones don't work, and only recklessly endanger the people in them, is this one:
If you were a parent, why would you want to entrust the safety of your precious child or children to abject cowards who would not be willing to lift a finger to protect them while your child or children are in their care?
And again, if they would be willing to protect them, how in the world could they have any hope of doing so, if they were not willing to be trained and armed so that they could do so effectively?!
Therefore: If teachers are such abject pacifist cowards that they would not be willing to be well-trained and armed, to be able to protect the children in their care, why in the world would you want any children in their care?
And the American people had best think long and hard about those questions and rethink their false strategy of creating Victim Disarmament Zones instead of trained and armed defense zones, because if something like an attack on Israel happens in the near future, you ain't seen nothing yet, people, compared to the bloodbath you may well see if Iranian and Hamas agents go en masse into the schools of this nation!
Updated 12-16: What if, instead of more useless gun ban laws, it were to be required that all teachers and other staff be armed and trained in SWAT, so they could immediately lock their children in a classroom and then go work as a team to clear their school of any threat(s), until the police arrived?
Wouldn't that be something constructive, for a change?
More interesting resources:
"PROVEN SOLUTIONS TO ENDING SCHOOL SHOOTINGS"
JPFO is an excellent organization.
Israel's armed school playgrounds
Posted by Jack Kemp on December 18, 2012
When I visited Israel in the 1990s, I recall walking by a Tel Aviv grade school that had a man carrying an Uzi submachine gun, standing guard over the children at play outside. Yesterday Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs had a photo of an Israeli woman grade school teacher carrying a rifle slung over her shoulder as she accompanied her children outside the school. As Pamela's caption reads, in Israel, they provide (armed) protection. In the US, they provide condoms. http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/12/media-alert...
There was a time in the frontier West when most women knew how to load and shoot a gun. Many women in the South were and are also adept with guns. Come to think of it, the left is always making an issue of women in the military being given greater combat related assignments. Here is a combat related assignment in the "home guard," a mission that any mother or woman acting in place of a mother can relate to: protecting the lives of her children.
This liberal fantasy of a "gun free zone" around schools invites every mentally unstable person to use it as a target range.Banning LEGAL guns will not stop the banning of ILLEGAL guns by criminals and the insane. As others have pointed out, European countries, with their strict gun control laws, have not stopped massacres. And there are other ways to kill people, readily available without a license, that can be used to kill people. At the very least, children seeing an armed teacher will not be taught how to be victims in school but rather the opposite.
Should Americans Learn From Israeli Gun Laws?