The Great Gun Debate of 2013
A debate of freedom, arrogance, and blatant ignorance
If you look at hashtags on twitter such as “#gun, #guncontrol, #gunrights, #nra” and so on, you will find an ongoing, vicious battle between gun owners and gun control activists. The issue with this debate is that there are not two well defined sides reaching for common ground, but contributors for each side looking from countless angles and scenarios. Yes, the current gun debate is a messy one. On top of all this pointless squabbling is a president that believes he can write a federal law that bans certain guns or certain magazines on top of making it more difficult to purchase guns. From the press release today, it appears that President Obama intends to use executive privelege in addition to Congressional legislation. Whatever action the “Annointed One” decides to take, I am sure it will piss off myself and numerous others that have this insane age-old faith in the (“little book” according to Piers Morgan) known as the Constitution. So let us take a look at this debate, which stole the national spotlight after the Sandy Hook shooting.
Before I get into the heart of the gun debate I will say that something must be done about the individuals showing similar disturbing signs of violence like the shooter (I refuse to say his name) at Sandy Hook. However, I cannot ramble on in the field of mental disturbance because I am no psychologist. I have, in fact, spent hundreds of hours with a gun in my hand and nothing can compare to that feeling of safety and control. Without further ado, I would like to point out that anyone making an argument against gun rights should look at the 2nd Amendment, and meditate on the meaning of the words in this amendment. Looking at the word “infringed” and it’s definition, which translates to “encroached upon”, we can see that any law even slightly threatening gun ownership would be unconstitutional because our right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed”. So, case closed right? Gun control is a dead end street and we just have to focus on some other cause such as mental instability, right? In the famous words of Lee Corso “Not so fast my friends!” because we have a President with complete disregard for the Constitution, unless it fits in his big government agenda. Not only does he ignore Constitutional values, but stomps on them with his actions daily. This same president wants to please a party that has historically pushed for more government involvement. With this in mind, it seems as if any legislation proposed by the Democrats or the president will completely disregard the real issues at hand and will most likely frustrate Conservatives and Libertarians nationwide.
Guns have many purposes in this country with one of these rights being specifically guaranteed in the 2nd Amendment. A “well governed militia” is called for in the 2nd Amendment, which means that Americans need to have guns and they need to have some of the best guns available. This militia is in place for protection of the people if the government fails to protect us, or if its the government we must protect ourselves from; therefore, it is only logical for the federal government to oppose gun ownership. In the same sense that Liberals would love to rid the country of their Conservative opposition, the government would have free reign if the people were disarmed because the imminent threat of the people fighting back no longer remains. Likewise, as opposing and equal parties are necessary, so are the counterweights of a government and an armed society. Which makes the gun debate understandable now, because the growing government is calling for shrinking of the opposition.
Now, most gun control advocates are not pushing for a complete gun ban, but laws more along the lines of establishing a national gun registry or universal background checks. Whatever these politicians decide, I’m sure those RINO’s representing us in Washington will lay down and let the liberals walk all over them as they have the last two years. This issue in Congress would not be so dangerous if those trying to instill gun control could actually pinpoint the problem, but they cannot. In fact the most irritating, angering issue with the gun debate is the complete ignorance of gun terminology amongst the politicians on both sides of the aisle and arrogant liberals who have decided what guns we should have and what guns should not be within reach of ordinary citizens. For example, last night on Hannity, I overheard Juan Williams talking about automatic weapons when referring to semi-automatics. I have also heard hundreds of liberals spew ignorance about the AR-15 and how hunters do not need them. I could rant for hours about the countless situations where we need at LEAST an AR-15: multiple criminals breaking into your house, a herd of about fifty hogs destroying your precious private property, or an overreaching tyrannical government posing to strike it’s own people. In the last case involving a tyrannical government, it seems that the liberals are already successful in weakening our arsenal if the most dangerous guns out there are merely semi-automatic.
My prediction is that if Obama uses executive privilege (rumored to take place on Tuesday the 15th) to force his own law down our throats, all hell will break loose from Conservatives nationwide. Anything less than threats of impeachment (Representative Steve Stockman mentioned this today) would be surprising, yet this issue would be left in the hands of those reliable ones in Congress. If Obama lets the fight go to Congress, then we will have to wait months before we have any kind of legislation in the works, and it will most likely have nothing to do with preventing another shooting like the one at Sandy Hook Elementary.