|
Herewith is my response. I will begin by using four scenarios to
illustrate my point.
A)
You are a 23-year-old girl and you have recently broken up with
your creepazoid boyfriend. He has been stalking you, so you
purchase a gun for your protection. Furthermore, you apply for a
concealed carry permit, so you can pack heat in your purse. Your
application sits on some little nudenik bureaucrat’s desk
awaiting his “approval”. Your ex-boyfriend follows you to the
grocery store around 10 o’clock one night. As you come out of
the store, he proceeds to rape you.
B) You came to America from Egypt 25 years ago. You have a
bachelor’s degree, an MBA and a well-paying job that affords you
and your family a comfortable suburban lifestyle. You have
thoroughly assimilated into American culture, so much so that
you have converted from Islam to Christianity and changed your
name from Jamir Ali to James Oliver. There has just been another
terrorist attack on American soil and, in its aftermath, a
series of assaults on Arab-Americans. You are walking your dog
one evening and four redneck punkazoids jump you, beat you to a
bloody pulp and leave you to die. Your concealed carry
application is sitting on the same desk as the application of
the young lady in the first scenario.
C) On the morning of April 20, 1999, you and about 1800 other
people are going about your daily business in a gun-free zone in
Littleton, Colorado. Two psychopathic malcontents walk in and
start spraying bullets all over the place, killing 13 people
before they kill themselves. No one shoots back, because this is
a “gun-free zone.”
D) On the morning of September 11, 2001, you are a crew member
aboard a gun-free zone that has just been commandeered by
terrorists. One of them pulls out a box cutter and slits your
throat. You are defenseless, as this is a gun-free zone. After
these terrorists off you, they proceed to off the pilot and
co-pilot, who are similarly defenseless. And then all hell
really breaks loose.
Each of the above stories involves crazy people and normal
people. Each involves people who obeyed gun laws suffering at
the hands of people who were undeterred by gun laws.
In only one of the above cases did the assailants use guns. In
perpetrating their orgy or blood, (C) Harris and Klebold broke
something like 19 or 20 laws. If someone plots for over a year
to undertake something as horrific as Columbine or 9/11, they
are by definition not deterred by your silly-posterior gun laws.
Gun laws do not deter crime. If you are determined enough, you
will use a gun anyway (Harris and Klebold) or you will find a
plan B such as a knife (O.J. Simpson), fertilizer (Tim McVeigh),
a bathtub (Andrea Yates) or box cutters (Mohammed Atta and
friends). The only people affected by gun laws are law-abiding
folks.
In the words of an old billboard I once saw, 10 out of 10
criminals prefer their victims disarmed. Disarming crazy people
does not make them less crazy or less criminal. It just leaves
law-abiding people defenseless. Evil abhors a vacuum. When you
disarm innocent people bad things happen.
Thus far, we have examined this issue at the “micro” level. Let
us now examine it at the “macro” level.
The
Second Amendment to our Constitution states:
“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.”
This Amendment does not “grant” any rights.
It guarantees a “right of the people” that already exists. It
does not merely apply to defense against murderers, rapists and
robbers, but to tyrants as well. The “well-regulated Militia” of
which it speaks does not mean the federally armed and sponsored
National Guard, but rather indigenous people skilled in both the
use of firearms as well as teamwork in the field.
Such a militia was necessary not for the security of any old
willy-nilly state, but of a “free state.” Militias played a
vital part in securing this nation's independence. The Founders
understood that an armed populace was an essential counterforce
against tyranny.
The history of the last century bears witness to this. Jews for
the Preservation of Firearms Ownership posts a wonderful
illustration of the relationship between
gun
control and genocide.
Various degrees of gun control – licensing,
confiscation, bans on private ownership, bans on concealed
carry, requiring demonstration of a “need” to own a firearm –
led to genocide in Armenia, Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Red
China, Guatemala, Uganda, Cambodia and Rwanda.
The world’s worst sickos can be found in
government. The sicker they are, the more power they accumulate.
Show me a tyrant – Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Kim
Il-Sung, Kim Jong-Il, Castro – who is not certifiably insane.
The ultimate aim of gun control is to totally disarm the
citizenry and leave them defenseless against psychopaths who
pull the strings and levers of power.
If you believe “we should take away all the guns”, ask yourself
what you mean by “we” as well as how such a “take away” shall be
implemented.
If you believe “we should take away all the
guns”, you had better think twice. And three or four or five
times if necessary.
So, my well-meaning friends who are skeptical
about the freedom philosophy, this is why disarming crazy people
does not work. Don’t worry: I did not arrive at all my current
beliefs overnight, so I do not expect you to either. You do not
have to like any of this. Just don’t let your emotions interfere
with your quest for truth.
Doug Newman is a periodic
political contributor to Couples Company, a Libertarian, (Small
Government / Full personal Accountability / Constitutional Law)
and devote non-Evangelical Christian. Further essays by
Doug can be viewed
HERE
|
