RSS

Does tragedy actually help gun rights?

05 Dec

In much the same way that World War II got us out of the Depression, it is one of those things that is not wished for, yet the reality of it remains.  One should not seek out war in order to bolster a country’s economy, nor should one wish for tragedy in order to bolster their position.

But the question remains, does tragedy benefit the pro gun crowd or the gun control zealots?

If you listen to the liberal mainstream media you are inundated with the self righteous fervor of liberty hating dogma that states that “such and such tragedy” is proof that people cannot be responsible for their own well being and as such shouldn’t have the right to keep and bear arms.

When it comes down to it, that is the only argument the gun control zealots believe in, because after all, they operable word is CONTROL, not gun.  The Bloombergs and Feinsteins and Obamas of the world don’t see the issue as guns and no guns, they see it as a matter of being able to control people or having people free to resist.

Conjecture you say?  Hardly.  I can even prove it.  In 2009 there were 9,146 homicides using a firearm (this includes gangland murders).   Yet in 2009 there were 33,808 VEHICULAR DEATHS.  Nearly 4 times as many people will die in a motor vehicle than will with a gun.

Where is Bloomberg and Feinstein and the rest of the zealots when this vehicular epidemic is plaguing the nation?  Where is the Bloomberg led group, Mayor’s Against Fast Cars or Feinstein and her push for Assault Vehicle Bans…because really, who needs a car that can go faster than 55 miles per hour.

We live in a car culture and it is killing us.  To take the zealots logic, the only need you would have for a car that goes over the speed limit is to commit crimes and therefore they should be made illegal.

There are less deaths the slower people go so we should have speed limits of 5 miles per hour…unless your are a public figure or rich enough to pay your way around it.

The galling hypocrisy of these gun control proponents is sickening.

But I am getting off topic.  Does gun related tragedies help the gun control zealots?

I say thee nay.

Here’s why; Bloomberg, Obama and their ilk have done a very good job of pulling the wool over the eyes of America, making it seem like they really only want “responsible” gun laws.  If a right or two gets infringed during the process, it’s only a small price to pay…”for the children” {gag}.

But when a tragedy strikes and you get windbags like Costas and Whitlock spewing their drivel, the curtain is pulled back and people get a glimpse of the true ugly face of the gun control rabidness.

By licking their lips and salivating over what they think will finally push the scales weighing safety/servitude and risk/liberty in their favor, they reveal themselves for the megalomaniac control freaks they are.

Furthermore, since the sleeping giant that resides in the heart of true Americans (the giant being self reliance and exceptionalism) begins to stir, people are finally seeing that their arguments hold no water.

Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora etc. were gun free zones.  Microcosms of the gun control utopia where no law abiding citizen is allowed to have guns.  Of course, laws do not stop criminals and as such these gun free zones became killing fields for criminals.

And that is the argument that points to how the aforementioned regrettable tragedies bolsters the argument for the Second Amendment.  When gun control is seen in the naked light of day to be completely useless in preventing a criminal from committing a crime, the masses see that they are responsible for their own protection.  That when seconds count, police are minutes away.  That the police will arrive to arrest the criminal, not to stop the crime.

When tragedy strikes, people realize that when the moment evil is before them,  they are alone.  Either they can be an unarmed lamb waiting for slaughter, or an armed lion willing to fight tooth and nail to triumph.

Tragedy reminds us that at the moment of truth, we stand alone and our actions will determine our fate.

FirearmsWelcome

 

We need to live in a country where tragedy inducing Gun Free Zone signs are replaced by the above sign.  We are Americans, our country was born out self reliance and governance.  We would be wise as a nation to remember thus.

 

Advertisements
 
10 Comments

Posted by on December 5, 2012 in Uncategorized

 

10 responses to “Does tragedy actually help gun rights?

  1. randy

    December 5, 2012 at 11:56 am

    People don’t get that laws will only be followed by law-abiding citizens. If you take away the guns of those people then all you have left is criminals.

     
  2. Bryan

    December 5, 2012 at 12:40 pm

    Look how well gun control works in Britain. Wait, wait… I appear to have made a few typos there. For a country with such strict laws, they still have an awful lot of gun violence perpetuated by… wait for it… criminals who don’t care.

     
    • PerfectOryab

      December 5, 2012 at 1:10 pm

      There is still some gun crime in UK, and anyway most of the killing by firearms are replaced by that of knives and other sharp/ heavy blunt objects

       
      • Bryan

        December 5, 2012 at 4:40 pm

        There is a fair amount of gun crime in the UK, as my post was intended to be sarcasm directed towards the people that assume that their gun control methods actually work because very few media outlets actually showcase what happens factually.

         
    • Uncle Lar

      December 6, 2012 at 7:47 am

      Looking at statistics for 2010 the UK, that bastion of rabid gun control with one fifth the population of the US, had nearly the same total number of violent crimes as we gun crazed Americans.

       
  3. Bill Saylor

    December 5, 2012 at 1:12 pm

    “megalomaniac control freaks they are.” Statement that clarifies the whole thing. The founding fathers included the 2nd amendment because they had seen the central control thing up close, the 2nd amendment was included to allow the states and individuals to protect themselves from the central government control.

     
  4. BHirsh

    December 6, 2012 at 8:38 am

    Yet, they reelected a rabid redistributionist to the White House.

    What does that tell you?

     
  5. Chad

    December 6, 2012 at 8:43 am

    Ugh. WW2 not get us out of the Great Depression. If someone builds a tank instead of a car and then that tank gets blown up, how has prosperity increased? Wealth was just destroyed. Watch this for fun(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc), then do more research on your own @ mises.org.

    But about the rest of your piece- I hope you are right that these statists are really shooting themselves in the foot. I know for a fact that every person who purchases and learns how to use a gun instantly stops listening to these idiots. So we need to keep on encouraging people to actually get out and shoot. As JFK said, The protection of our rights can endure no longer than the performance of our responsibilities.

     
    • Tony Oliva

      December 6, 2012 at 9:24 am

      Not to turn this into a WWII economics discussion but the US government’s reaction to its entry into WWII was to institute massive deficit spending, and the conscription of all able bodied young men for the war effort, thus creating a full-employment economy which was the immediate end to the Great Depression.

      A belief existed that another depression might occur upon the return of the young men to the labor force so a comprehensive veteran’s benefit package was legislated. The logistics of the ensuing peace created a natural US trade advantage which allowed for the unfettered repayment of the war generated deficit. The liberal veteran’s educational and housing benefit resulted in increased productivity and a construction boom. These forces combined to forestall any otherwise feared return to the depression.

      Most historians and economists agree that the Depression did not end until the beginning of WWII.
      It improved economics because the war created more jobs such as creating weaponry and manufacturing the raw materials to run a war. These new jobs were able to jump start the economy.

       
  6. Julie

    December 17, 2012 at 5:42 am

    Reblogged this on carlsonsblog.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: