In the wake of the sickening tragedy in Uvalde, Texas, the majority of a particular political party is, again, dancing in the blood of murdered children to push their gun control agenda. They are gunning (pun intended) hard for universal background checks and red flag laws. Neither proposition would have stopped this killer, or any previous mass killer, as they have consistently not been reported and have passed background checks or stolen the gun used. Therefore, what is the immediate reaction to such tragedy from this faction? Forcing unconstitutional measures that will do nothing to mitigate such future incidents but will effectively trample on the rights of law-abiding citizens. Make no mistake, that is by design.
The politicians who want gun control understand that it will do nothing to prevent crime; they do it only to curb your rights. Many who vote for these people are just ignorant, but make no mistake, these politicians who push this don’t believe their own rhetoric. Have any of them volunteered to send their armed security home? Of course not. Even though Chuck Schumer says “more guns on premises is not the answer,” he has guns protecting him 24/7, and I am betting that his children went to schools with armed security. Elitism at its finest.
So, here are the talking points to use when speaking to people about this:
1. Gun control cannot disarm criminals. There are 120 guns for every 100 people in this country. What law will remove the availability of firearms from those who wish to do harm? This is why the entire leftist agenda is focused on distorting reality; Afterall, if math is now racist and 2+2 might equal 5, such clear logic that proclaims it impossible to remove the object from accessibility due to overwhelming numbers is now contested. If you imagine it so, it will be! Make no mistake, every aspect of this agenda is related to the next.
2. Even if gun control worked, the harm defeats the good. The estimated number of defensive gun uses, annually, range from 500,000 to 2,500,000 depending on who’s polls you want to believe. So, here is a thought experiment: let’s say only 10% of the LOWEST estimate matters. Let’s say 50,000 of those defensive gun uses annually (only 10% of the low estimate) prevents a murder, a rape, an assault, an abduction. Ask the next gun control fanatic that you interact with, “are you willing to trade that 50,000 victims for the roughly 15,000 ‘gun deaths’ that happen each year? That is the rough number if we exclude suicide and most of those 15,000 are gangsters shooting fellow gangsters. About 100 people are victims of the headline grabbing mass shootings, which are all the media care about, since if they actually wanted to save lives they might do something about Chicago and Baltimore. The mass murderer and gangster will still have guns, but the citizens who defend themselves each year are the ones who will be hampered by new gun control. Again, by design. Ask, are you willing to trade that 50,000 victims for the current 100 victims of mass shootings?
3. Even if preventing murders was possible through gun control, which it is not, we won’t disarm and be subjugated under a tyrannical government. Regardless of your political leaning, there is one political party in this country that wants to disarm the populace. For me, that is all that matters. The Russian Bolsheviks, the German Nazis, the Chinese Communist Party, and every other tyrannical political entity in human history has pushed civilian disarmament. The American political party that pushes this agenda is in good company, as you can see. No, we are not giving up the guns. Thousands have been killed throughout history by criminals, but tens of millions have been killed by government. That is the true reason for the 2nd Amendment, and that is the true reason we will not give it up, no matter how badly the anti-gunners want to rid themselves of the expectation of self-reliance.
Bonus Point: And, after all the bashing of a certain political party, because they, indeed, deserve it, let me say this about the other party: stop with the “mental health” crap. Again, the majority of these killers have been deemed freak shows only after the fact. What good does harping on mental health do if no steps are ever taken before the incident? Texas is a solid red state, why don’t all schools have the Guardian program in place? While the political right does not shamelessly dance in blood and blatantly push to disarm the populace, they have not done anything to mitigate this problem, either.
Another Bonus Point: For any of our European friends who wish to see the United States become enlightened and sophisticated like Europe, you can keep your sophistication. London has more homicides annually than does New York. Although Great Britain brags about only having 30 gun deaths a year, they fail to mention how citizens are afraid to walk the streets because the homicide, rape, and assault stats are through the roof. You can keep that. I don’t find being helpless in the face of knife-wielding thugs sophisticated at all. Actually, I find it indignant. But, a majority of Europeans (not all, there are many exceptions) believe in having their betters, similar to our political left.
For Europe, Politicians guarded by guns is fine. But, the citizen is helpless against the thug roving the streets. Less shootings in Europe, but mass knife attacks on London Bridge and box trucks killing scores of people in France, that is all good. Oh, and don’t look behind the curtain to see over 100 people killed in Paris by Full-Auto AK wielding terrorists, and over 80 people killed in Norway by a White Supremacist guy, or any other such thing, despite all of that draconian gun control. Sorry, Europe, you can keep all of that peasantry to yourself.
It is time to stop letting these sickening attacks on our rights pass unchallenged. Everything the antis propose would do nothing to stop criminal activity, but everything to undermine your constitutional rights. It is a hard NO. Make that known and clear.
With your permission, I would like to post a response to your article over on my personal blog, though I would give you a heads up – it won’t be in agreement.
Sure, not a problem
Thank you. The link, should you wish to look, is here: https://meerkatmusings.co.uk/a-hard-no-and-a-few-firm-responses/
Don’t think the “people” means every living individual. There sre exceptions such as mentally ill, convicted felons and others I could mention. Age 21 could be the limit as easy as she 18. 18 is not stated as being the required age.
I am open to the idea of making buying age 21 IF the entire nation agrees that 21 is the age of adulthood. That means no military service and no voting until 21. But, if 18 is the legal age of adulthood, which it currently is, then a constitutional right is just that. Do we require 21 years of age for someone to convert to a religion? Either 21 is the age of adulthood or not. Of course, it will not stop a single attack anyway. An 18 year old who wants to commit a heinous act will find a gun in a country with 120 guns for every 100 people. Such a law will, however, prevent an 18 year old mother, living alone with her child, from being able to protect herself and her family.
I am a peaceful person by nature. Having said that, try and take my guns from me and significant blowback will happen.