The Federal Gov. Wants More Mass Murders
By de Andréa, Opinion Editorialist
for ‘THE BOTTOM LINE’:
for ‘THE BOTTOM LINE’:
Published September 22, 2015
Why would I say the government wants more mass murders like Sandy hook, Chattanooga, Aurora, Columbine, etcetera? Because it’s true. The more mass murders the more support for gun bans and so-called GUN FREE ZONES. The more GUN FREE ZONES the more mass murders, and again, the more support for gun bans and so on! But the question is, what would be the motive for the government to encourage mass murders , or to ban guns?
If you think this is just another pro-gun pitch, you would be right. But I believe the Second Amendment is the most important Constitutional law in America. Everything that America stands for, hangs on this one law. Without it, there is no America! So one cannot say too much about this important Issue.
Recently I had the opportunity to speak with a small group of people, a good cross section of America as it turned out. Some were pro-gun, some were anti-gun, neither really knew why. I asked the question: What would America look like if all guns were banned? Some said the crime rate would go down, until I asked why the per capita violent crime rate in the U.K., where there has been a near total gun ban for nearly 30 years, is four times higher than that of the U.S.? You see, it is the criminals that do not obey gun laws, bans, or GUN FREE ZONES! I went on to say: No guns - no freedom…at all! Which created an understandable amount of discussion pro and con. How do I know that all freedom will be lost? History my friend. Every time in history where a government confiscated arms from the citizenry, it opened the doors to despotic tyranny. More importantly, the promise of total power and control, is what ultimately drives the banning and confiscation of arms.
With the Communist media’s contemptuous attack on gun rights which uses mass murder attacks as their “ammunition,” some kind of response is necessary to combat this misinformation. We are a nation of over three hundred million people, and an estimated 270 million to more than a half billion guns are spread out among approximately a 190 million legal gun owners. We are the freest nation in the world because we are the most well-armed nation in the world. It is a heritage passed down to us from the framers through the 2ndAmendment to the Constitution, which guarantees the right of every law-abiding American to own and carry a firearm.
Even with these garish numbers of guns and gun owners, gun violence in America among legal gun owners is statistically insignificant. In fact, the vast majority of gun crime is committed by criminals who carry their weapons illegally which would continue even if there was a total gun ban. Meanwhile, in America, a gun in the hand of a law abiding citizen is 7 times more likely to stop a crime than to commit one.
So why ‘is there’ a constitutional law that guarantees Americans the right to keep, as well as to bear arms? Why indeed! Let’s look at the law: “A well regulated militia, [originally included the words “comprised of the people” later removed because it was agreed that it went without saying] being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. So what is the answer to why ‘is there’ a constitutional law that guarantees Americans the right to keep, as well as to bear arms? The law itself says ‘why my friend, it is “necessary to the security of a free State.” Without guns in the hands of citizens the security of freedom is gone, gone, gone.
Furthermore, consider the recent and most famous instances of mass shootings in the news. All of these rampages took place in areas described as “GUN FREE ZONES”. The movie theater in Aurora, CO, the school in Newtown, CT, the military base in Fort Hood, TX, and the Navy Yard in Washington, D.C. All of these places were gun free zones where the shooters took advantage of the guaranteed indefensible state of their victims. In fact, if you try to remember back to other infamous mass shootings from Paducah, KY to Columbine, CO the gun free zone is a common thread. However, the media has placed the idea of blaming gun-free zones out of bounds in the political discourse – anyone who considers eliminating these so-called “safe” zones (or un-safe zones depending on your reality) is immediately labeled an extremist. In fact, a simple Google search of gun free zones returns stories of mass killing and liberal attempts to deflect blame from gun free zones. The gun free zone is one of the useful idiots of the Communists’ “hills to die on”, even though it’s many times their own children who are facing death. All of the perpetrators choose these unprotected areas because they offer the path of least resistance for the killer. Consider that in the killing at the Aurora, CO movie theater the shooter had his choice of seven theaters within 20 minutes of his home… yet he chose the only theater that did not allow patrons to carry weapons even thought it was the farthest away. It was a gun-free zone. Even more telling is the shooting that took place in Oregon just days before the attack at Newtown. In the Oregon shooting, a killer marched through a mall, shooting at helpless victims -- that is until he encountered armed resistance. Immediately after seeing that one of his intended victims had a weapon, the Oregon shooter retreated and fired one last shot… the bullet that ended his own life. Just imagine how Sandy Hook would have turned out if the teaching and office staff would have been armed. Likely the only one that would have died that horrible day would have been the would-be killer.
In fact, situations like this are more common than you realize, perhaps, as the Oregon story illustrates, because the media doesn’t seem to cover the cases that end well because of an armed citizen. BuzzFeed has a neat collection of mass shootings that were stopped by armed citizens, who were in the right place at the right time. Had you heard of any of these instances? Are they commonly brought up in the media?
The honest truth is this. When you couple the fact that so few of our gun crimes are committed by legal gun owners, with the fact that most of these mass shootings happen in gun free zones by mentally imbalanced people… we get a completely different picture than the portrait painted by the alphabet soup media and the Democrat Communist Party.
power from free Americans by disarming us? The scary truth is as I said earlier, that the reason we even have a 2nd Amendment is to ensure that we would have the firepower to dislodge a tyrannical government if the need ever arose. Today we see members of our government trying to disarm us by, unconstitutionally, and therefore illegally, changing laws and enflaming public sentiment against us. Our government is filled with power hungry legislators who fear our weapons because those weapons give us our own power of freedom.
THE BOTTOM LINE: Murder is always evil. It is always a violent and destructive act that attacks the very fabric of our communities. We must respond, and we must try our best to ensure these things happen less and less in the future. However, we cannot allow the emotion of the moment to overcome our abilities to think independently, reason and consider logic as well as statistical truth. The gun control ideas of the left wing Communists are a red herring. They create more problems then they solve. The best answers to violence and public safety come from pro-Americans who love liberty and value independence.
Don’t let the hate America media mislead you – we are safer with a gun in our hands than with our empty hands in the air begging for mercy. Without arms you will not only lose your freedom, you could lose your life…
Thanks for listening – de Andréa
Please pass on this article to everyone on your email list. It may be the only chance for your friends to hear the truth.
Copyright © 2014 by Bottom Line Publishing, All Rights Reserved - Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
Disclaimer - The writer of this blog is not responsible for the language or advertisements used in links to referenced articles as source materials.