Jan 10 2013

Left Playing Dangerous Game With Talk Of Gun Control

Published by at 10:57 am under All General Discussions

Interesting developments this last week on the 2nd Amendment front. Even CNN’s prissy Brit (who obviously hides behind armed guards) is ramping up is flailing ratings by getting into the mix.  Media types are so transparent – all show and ratings.

But, after last month’s massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, his outrage boiled over. He has kept “Guns in America,” as a primary focus of his nightly broadcast, and asked “How many more kids have to die, before you guys say, ‘We want less guns, not more?’”

Sadly, Morgan like most brain-parked-in-neutral liberals miss the fact guns have saved many more kids from massacre than have killed them. Every year gun deaths are avoided by armed citizens. But of course, if it is not on the news for these blindered people, it does not exist.

Here is a true story of children being saved by an armed citizen:

While reports of Tuesday’s shooting at the Clackamas Town Center Mall in Oregon, dominated the national media, until Friday’s horrific shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, one very important detail has been repeatedly (and intentionally) left out of the MSM’s coverage.

The shooter, Jacob Tyler Roberts, was confronted with an armed citizen, at which time he ran away and shot himself. By the time police arrived on the scene, Roberts was already dead.

I heard three shots and turned and looked at Casey and said, ‘are you serious?,’” he said.

The friend and baby hit the floor. Meli, who has a concealed carry permit, positioned himself behind a pillar.

“He was working on his rifle,” said Meli. “He kept pulling the charging handle and hitting the side.”

The break in gunfire allowed Meli to pull out his own gun, but he never took his eyes off the shooter.

“As I was going down to pull, I saw someone in the back of the Charlotte move, and I knew if I fired and missed, I could hit them,” he said.

Meli took cover inside a nearby store. He never pulled the trigger. He stands by that decision.

“I’m not beating myself up cause I didn’t shoot him,” said Meli. “I know after he saw me, I think the last shot he fired was the one he used on himself.”

Two things to note here. First off, the gunman was stopped. Second, the armed citizen did NOT need to fire a shot. Will these incidents always be so cut and dry? No. But armed citizens are the first defense against nuts with guns. Not police who have to be called to the scene after it is over.

The real problem with the recent shooting is a parent who had guns accessible to a clearly mentally disturbed child. Even if it was hunting rifles, this sick kid was going to be a danger to others.

The other problem: while we place armed guards around our money, our planes, our politicians and our media stars, we don’t put them around our kids in schools. How many dead children do we need before schools stop fretting over a 5 year old forming a fake gun out of their fingers and realize we need to protect our children from nutcases and armed terrorists?

So, since logic and the full story is not on the liberals’ side, why the big PR push?

Is the left that reckless and power happy? Possibly for some. They may realize they have a small window to pass the rest of their fantasies, and they also can tell America is still rejecting those fantasies and not willing to give up on the House GOP as a stop gap.

But maybe it is not all clumsy emotion? Maybe it is a well orchestrated poke in the eye to Main Street. If this debate riles up the hot heads into some stupid reaction, then this ‘debate’ will create a fracture between the parties supporting the 2nd Amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As noted, the right to ‘keep and bear arms’ is not for hunting or sport. It is a right designated as ‘necessary to the security of a free State’. And no, ‘State’ does not mean one of the United States. It means the federal  ‘State’ of American government. This means the people have the right to protect our government from tyranny being applied at the controls of State. Our military protects us from outsiders. We protect ourselves from insiders. This is also not law enforcement.

So why the big play now? I think it is to create a reaction. And as long as Main Street keeps a cool head in all this, it is going nowhere.

It is not ridiculous to see the left wishing violence and revolution would break out, so that martial law (and an Imperial Obama) could be instated. Personally, I think a good laugh at the idiocy on display is the best response to make. At the moment, extreme gun control is not something polling very well.

Finally, I understand why some in the media are intimidated by an armed Main Street. They do receive lots of ugly and nasty threats every day. It is why threatening harassment is not a viable political methodology. It is why hot heads and extremists need to be culled from any mainstream, broad political coalition. So why I can sympathize with the paranoia (having been stalked by some creepy lefties myself on this blog), I will not let fear and insecurity drive me to extreme views. And removing Americans’ right to keep and bear arms (responsibly of course) is an extreme view.

Update: Presidential wannabe Biden claims the President will act. Of course, if he over reaches he will initiate a wrath of court challenges (since the President cannot unilaterally touch the Constitution). And that may be a good thing. An over reach resulting in thousands of court cases in every state, by citizens, corporations and the states themselves, would consume all the political capitol the President has from the election, and expose a side of Democrats that could make 2010 look like a walk in the park compared to 2014! Everyone on the pro-2nd Amendment side needs to take a deep breathe and grab the opportunity this kind of misstep could provide.

2 responses so far

2 Responses to “Left Playing Dangerous Game With Talk Of Gun Control”

  1. Mordecai Subaru says:

    I am going out on a limb here,
    I suspect that these shooting incidents are not random but
    organized by someone connected to our government to create
    the fake outrage that would support an attempt to disarm America.

    Fortunately, I have no proof that this is true.
    If anyone had proof, they would be as dead as Breitbart.

  2. OFg8r says:

    With respect to the argument that we should have armed protection for schools since we have armed protection for so many other valuable, and useless, entities; one of the most recent objections is that the sight of guns in the school would traumatize the kids.

    This is typical of the inanity that passes for argument from the anti-gun crowd. Why assume that the gun of an armed “protector” need be visible? We see multitudes of Secret Service agents whenever the President appears outside the grounds of his palace. Ever see a gun? Do you think they aren’t there? How many flights have you made that had Air Marshals on board? Who knows? They do not advertise their presence. Ever see a gun? Do you doubt that they are armed?

    No, the armed protectors in school should be anonymous, and the guns should be concealed. Kids are not traumatized. Would be killers are not sure where the threat is coming from. Is it the guy who looks like the janitor? Is it the woman who looks like a teacher?

    Following this scheme, thrifty school systems could follow the Air Marshal template. Publicly announce that there will be armed response in some schools. But, no one knows who they are, which schools they are in, and when they are there. Not unless someone tries to massacre kids in one of the protected schools. But, the potential killer is more likely to look for a “gun free” zone to find targets.

    I hope that folks are going to challenge the faulty assumptions and frequent lapses in logic that drive the other side of the debate.