More Guns Not Less: The reason we have the Second Amendment
After reading the George Costanza comments about the ‘Dark Knight’ shootings in Colorado chastising gun ownership, it is time to speak the truth about the reason we have the Second Amendment in the first place—the cold hearted truth which cannot be spoken about since progressives have turned the entire argument into an emotional one. Costanza isn’t the only one to say after the tragic shooting that there is no reason common citizens should have access to assault weapons and ammunition clips that allow over 100 rounds to be shot before reloading. Many sensitive types—other actors and politicians in the wake of the shooting were quick to express outrage that the American public should not have access to guns at all, let alone military grade firearms. They reason that we already have a military, and a police force, so the term “well regulated militia” as it’s described in the Second Amendment is already covered. We hire those defensive entities to do “protective” work for us, so the common population does not need to own firearms—in their view.
Pro gun people in reaction to the ignorance of the sensitive progressive types suffering from extreme levels of naiveté have tried not to hurt the feelings of their counterparts in direct argument by saying weapons are needed for hunting and self defense—but that’s not why we need the Second Amendment.
While people like George Costanza wish to believe that the security of our property can be hired out, just as they believe the education of children can as well, they fail to acknowledge a fundamental fact about human nature–the desire to control others. When one human being has more power than another human being, abuses will take place. It happens all the time with sexual abuse cases, and it happens all the time in regards to police officers abusing their right to assert dominance over civilians just because they have a gun. There are thousands and thousands of examples of police abuse over common citizens every year that are covered up because when law enforcement goes bad, there isn’t anyone to police the police.
Most of the actors who speak out against gun control live in social bubbles in the valley of land that rests between the mountains of California dividing Las Vegas with Los Angeles and the Pacific Ocean. Talking with some of these people as I have in the past, I doubt they know much about the world beyond those mountains to the east except when they travel to Vegas. They are not self reliant individuals, but they don’t have to be. They get paid good sums of money which helps isolate them from the outside world. If they are big actors they probably employ private body guards, so they can’t imagine a world where guns are needed. They use their money as a weapon in a different way, so they don’t need guns.
Politicians in Washington already steal for a living, so it’s to their advantage to have a society that does not carry guns. It makes it much easier for them to steal from the tax payers. Politicians use the civilian police force to enforce the money schemes they enact, so they have no need of guns to carry out their devastating desires. And residents of New York made a concession to their freedom to live on that island of concrete so they could see pretty lights and take their shot at success in the Big Apple. Politicians like Bloomberg who have vast amounts of wealth hire out all their protect duties, and when they need something from politics, they simply grease the wheels with their money, so they have no need of guns.
But for everyone else, the ability to own a gun is the only thing that stands between freedom and total control by an unruly government. The Second Amendment is there to protect the American population from an out-of-control government who can turn our police and military against us with a simple signature. For people like Costanza who was most likely having an enjoyable New Years Eve party in Hollywood with his acting friends, they weren’t aware, or didn’t want to be aware of the NDAA Act President Obama signed in Hawaii while nobody was watching on New Years Eve giving himself the power to call martial law and arrest American citizens for the suspicion of terrorism. In the case of the communist Obama, he could view people who advocate capitalism as a terrorist to his political agenda, so the NDAA Act gives him the power to use police and the military to carry out arrest and detainment of American citizens perpetually. This is a very dangerous situation, and most of our current Congress and Senate signed in favor of the law under the disguise of protecting America from terrorism.
Government cannot be trusted under any circumstances. When given power, they will take more than they are given 100% of the time. Only high quality minded people can handle such temptations without abuse. I believe there are a few such people in our current government, but not many. Our society just does not produce such people, not just in America, but anywhere in the world. When given the opportunity to abuse power, most people will. The only protective measure anyone can have is the ability to be just as armed as the military. That is the spirit of the Second Amendment.
When the people of America lose respect for the law, because the law has abused their rights, the American people are obligated to remove the corrupt from office and re-establish government. When politicians show they do not respect the vote and will lie, cheat and steal to obtain office so they can gain access to all the perks given by the tax payers, then more aggressive measure may be needed to restore the Republic. And that won’t happen with broom sticks and wooden swords. Currently the politicians can use our military against us, and the police now fall under direct Presidential authority because of the NDAA Act. If a United States President goes bad during their term they can use the police and military to keep them in office using martial law to stay in power.
Nobody wants to believe any President would be so bad, that such a thing could happen, but the precedent has been set in the latest trends of Presidents both Republican and Democrat to use Executive Order to by-pass congress. More and more, members of the Executive Branch seem inclined to believe that they are kings of America, rather than people’s representatives.
If America is unarmed, law enforcement would never have to worry about ramifications of abuse. The thought in their minds that a gun may be present when they knock on a door, or pull over a motorist gives them respect to uphold their side of law. If that threat is removed, abuse is a temptation that all too often will show itself, as it currently does on occasion. There are already eminent domain issues that arise where politicians use legal manipulation to obtain property they have no right to in order to build a shopping center or a new highway declaring “the greater good” as their reasons. But the real reason is to take care of a financial contributor who simply wants the property and uses the government and therefore the police to obtain that property so money can be made in the looting of it.
The Second Amendment is in our founding document to ultimately protect our property from foreign and domestic enemies. Domestic enemies are not always the kinds of people who hijack airplanes to run into buildings. They can be in our own government, put there by greedy interests to subtly steal American property and terrorize individual lives. Having a well armed population keeps everyone honest. Without that threat, evil will show itself.
I don’t want to believe it, but the Aurora shooting looks to be a “false flag” situation. We’ve seen it before where the CIA, ATF, and other government agencies get caught trying to manipulate circumstances in order to gain a public outcome designed to manipulate large numbers of people. That is what happened to Randy Weaver in the Ruby Ridge Massacre, and it happened under the direction of Eric Holder with Fast and Furious recently. That’s why Eric Holder has been found in “contempt of Congress.” Holder ignored the charge because he is head of the Justice Department working directly for President Obama. The only people who could prosecute Holder all work under him, so the contempt charge will go nowhere as long as Holder, and Obama are in office. Government has been caught several times attempting to manipulate people through coerced friendships into committing diabolical acts without being directly involved. It would not surprise me that this Aurora shooting is one of those times. The process is very similar to how sex trafficking works, where pimps use women to collect vast sums of money selling their bodies and out of fear; they turn that money over to their pimps. Such coercive measures have been utilized by government officials before and they will be done again. The reason that government must behave in a manipulative political manner is because they fear being caught by an armed public. If the guns are taken away, the actions of coercion will no longer be hidden; they will be out in the open.
The best defense against violence from all domestic enemies, which include the ‘Dark Night Shooter’, is a well armed population. It would have been much better if there were armed citizens in the theater to gun down James Holmes as he unloaded his ammunition into an unprotected audience. Progressives will say that this is not the Wild West, that we are a civilized society that should not be trying to kill each other with guns. But they are wrong, and in denial over the nature of the human being.
The old hippie notion of peace on earth is a utopian wish that is reckless, and stupid. It is that notion of peace that is behind the desire for gun control. Its social engineering which assumes that government can be trusted with complete power and control over the population, and it can’t. The people, who support guns, do not yield their lives and property to the blind trust of government. They want guns so they know that if the absolute worst case scenario comes about, that they can defend their property from an intrusive government. It hasn’t any thing to do with hunting, although that is a consideration. The gun is one of the reasons people are free. Fewer guns mean less freedom, and ironically, less economic activity because government without the threat of violence being present will inject itself everywhere with impunity, and that costs money by way of opportunity cost.
The people who want to ban guns in favor of a safe society are fools who are in denial of basic human instincts. The gun equalizes everyone, and is a necessary check on the many balances that are required in a thriving society. The quality of a country is not measured on how few people die; it is on the quality of life for those who live. The rest of the world does have it wrong, Canada, England and every gun banning nation have created docile civilizations that are easily conquered and do not have worldwide respect. America will not have world enemies if it continues to lose its economic power, but if it hopes to remain a superpower, it will have enemies both foreign and domestic because that is the nature of being the best. And the gun is extremely important to maintaining that superpower status. The gun is the symbol of everything being an America is. Those who wish to remove them from our society are the same who wish to change America into something else—which is not acceptable.