President Trump has drawn back a bit on his support for the
NRA in reaction to the recent Parkland Massacre in which 17 people (students &
adults) were killed by an ex-student of the High School Nikolas Cruz. Second
Amendment proponents view this as a betrayal. Justin Smith shares his feelings
on the issue.
On a personal level I believe something must be done to protect
soft targets (like schools, but there are many more soft targets)
from terrorism and nut jobs. HOWEVER, gun confiscation or restriction is NOT
the solution. I won’t delve into alternative solutions here, but I will state
my largest concern about gun control that will affect in law abiding American.
Especially due to Obama weaponizing government agencies –
including law enforcement and intel agencies – I have zero trust in government
to not force some unwanted way of life down my throat. Gun control will lead to
tyrannical totalitarianism. Justin Smith’s thoughts below should warn of future
potential government tyranny that begins with gun control.
JRH 3/3/18
****************
Until My Last Dying Gasp
By Justin O. Smith
Sent March 2, 2018 7:18 PM
Let me be as clear as I can be. I don't give a good damn how
many Americans have died in recent shootings, when their lives are placed next
to the liberty of millions of Americans, for generations to come. President
Trump and Democrat and Republican senior senators, those who beamed at the
prospect of exerting greater gun control during their February 28th meeting,
seemed to forget that so many more lives have been saved by the right to
self-defense, as they attacked the Second Amendment, due process under the law
and individual liberty; and regardless of any new illegitimate and
unconstitutional "law" they may implement, through coercion or
"might makes right" action, they will still be wrong and spitting in
the faces of the Founders and the American people.
Today's criminals are nearly always armed with
semi-automatic weapons, so police are not the only ones who need AR-15s.
Criminals victimize the public, and if citizens are to stand a fighting chance
against criminals, they too need effective weapons.
However, America now finds itself saddled with a Trump
administration, which is not so different from a Clinton administration on the
Second Amendment after all. Trump endorsed the "assault weapons" ban,
background checks for private sales at gun shows and raising the age for
purchasing firearms to twenty-one. He also contended Congress was
"petrified of the NRA", as he tore into fellow Republicans as tools
of the NRA and handed Democrats a propaganda victory.
As Katie Pavlich, journalist and Fox News contributor,
recently noted [Outnumbered
Video], despite the AR-15s popularity, data from Homeland Security
shows that handguns are the weapon of choice when it comes to mass shootings.
She also stated: "And let's not
forget that during the church massacre in Texas ... it was an NRA-certified
instructor who used an AR-15 to stop the killing ... ".
During the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the
Supreme Court stated that the right to self-defense pre-existed
government, which had already been confirmed by U.S. v. Cruikshank in 1875
and never overturned. The court went further in Heller, and it articulated the
right of the individual to use firearms, that are at the same level of
sophistication as firearms one's potential adversary might have, whether that
person is a criminal bad guy, psychopath or a soldier of a tyrannical
government. And this must negate any attempt to ban semi-automatic rifles, even
those deemed "assault weapons".
The suggestion to raise the age limit is a non sequitur argument, and once again, a punishment
of law abiding Americans. Age is not indicative of good sense or good moral
character. Timothy McVeigh was in his late twenties when he bombed the Murrah
Federal Building and the Las Vegas shooter was sixty-four. Aside from this,
guns aren't the problem any more than age can denote one's mental stability, or
lack thereof.
Forty-eight years ago at the age of thirteen, I would often
walk through the main streets of Dixon, Missouri, with my twelve gauge shotgun
slung across one arm and on my way to the fields and backwoods trails to shoot
wild hogs, and I would happily wave at the police and sheriff's deputies, as
they drove by. No one thought this to be anything unusual.
Mental illness and its role in gun violence was also part of
the discussion, and President Trump revealed his despotic side, when he
explicitly denounced due process of the law, saying: "... take the
firearms first, and then go to court ... because a lot of times, by the time
you go to court, it takes so long to go to court to get the due process
procedures, I like taking the guns early ... take the guns first, go through
due process second."
Who deems these people dangerous? the government? family?
friends? It takes more than just one assertion, one allegation, and it must
receive due process consideration, as guaranteed by the Constitution.
Otherwise, the mere accusation of mental illness might become a subterfuge to
disarm thousands of normal people, perhaps political opponents, by any future
administration.
Trump's far left suggestion to grab guns without legal cause
was radical, idiotic, fascistic and unconstitutional. Such a comment from any
Democrat president would have resulted in armed stand-offs with the police,
calls for impeachment and a fury from the American people hotter than a
thousand 100 megaton nukes exploding.
Senator Ben Sasse, a member of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, was the only Republican to openly oppose President Trump, as he stated: "Strong leaders
don't automatically agree with the last thing that was said to them. We have a
Second Amendment and due process of the law for a reason. We're not ditching
any Constitutional protections simply because the last person the President
talked to today doesn't like them."
At what point are Trump's supporters going to hold him
accountable for his outlandish statements? At what point will they stop
excusing him?
God forbid that America should ever descend into real
tyranny, however, Trump's remarks show precisely the reason America must not
allow the Second Amendment to be eroded. Modern history is replete with
examples of fascist and communist regimes that exterminated a combined total of
160 million of their own people, between 1940 and 1980 [Closest
citation I could in cursory search], and, in light of our own early history under the British,
it is ever more important for Americans to retain the right to possess modern
semi-automatic weapons, to ensure that our government never feels it is more
powerful than its citizens.
Foremost among our unalienable rights, the Framers of the
Constitution recognized our right to life and to defend life -- one's self,
one's family and one's property -- by ratifying the Second Amendment. They
wrote the amendment understanding that it did not grant this right and the
right to self-defense was not dependent on that instrument for its existence.
It was written to ensure that all future U.S. governments would respect
the right to keep and bear arms, as a natural extension of the
right to self-defense, in natural law and God's law, standing alone and
independent of the Constitution.
President Trump is a damned dangerous fool, and anyone who
seeks to undermine our right to self-defense and to keep and bear arms for
lawful purposes, through Trump's proposals, isn't a friend to the American
people. Those who seek added "security", in any manner other than
targeting the criminals, who mock our existing gun laws, rape laws, robbery
laws and homicide laws, only ensure security will not exist, our liberty will
be eroded, and we will cease to be a free people. And for everyone who thinks
Trump and his fellow despots are right, you can relinquish your rights like
sheep, and I'll keep and defend my God-given Rights Until MY LAST DYING
GASP.
_____________________
John R. Houk, Editor
All source links or any text
enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.
© Justin O. Smith
No comments:
Post a Comment