By Tim Mullen
As in all recent national tragedies, our so-called leaders feel they “have to do something.” The 536 mules that run this country couldn’t drag me to water if I were dying of thirst. The events of September 11, 2001 brought us one unnecessary war and one unwinnable war. The 2007 housing collapse rewarded bankers who should have been jailed, and the medicine conjured up in the kitchen sink and force-fed to us to fix the problem will eventually kill us. The Newtown, Connecticut massacre will produce another unmitigated disaster of legislation targeting law-abiding gun owners.
Most of our so-called leaders have blood on their hands in regards to the most recent tragedy. With little to no regard to the founding of this country and its most basic documents, they have, in their perceived infinite wisdom, overruled the most basic tenets of a free society. Nowhere in the Second Amendment do the words “except schools, college campuses and government (the people’s property)” appear. They have created zones in which an armed maniac is assured the maximum number of kills before any kind of response from the good guys or law enforcement. Hiding under a desk or locking oneself in a closet is not much of a plan of defense.
The Second Amendment has everything to do with defending against tyranny.
In this respect, NRA President Wayne LaPierre was dead-on in his post-tragedy remarks. LaPierre, however, in true neo-conservative fashion, stated the solution is to add several hundred thousand security staff to police our schools. Someone should inform him that this country already is, by far, the world’s premier police state and that government at the state and local level is just as bankrupt as at the federal level, just without access to a printing press. In addition, LaPierre’s plan would require a whole lot of expensive training.
Perhaps even more disappointing is the response from the public. With little to no understanding of why the Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights, people are eager to jump on board with the anti-gun hysteria. I even hear hunters and sport shooters calling for the ban on assault weapons. The Second Amendment has nothing to do with the right to hunt, target shoot, collect or even defend one’s self in his or her own home. The Second Amendment has everything to do with defending against tyranny. Ask a German citizen of the 1920s or a Cambodian of the 1950s about one of the first steps taken to ensure a compliant populace.
I am not saying we will head to where they ended up. A more likely scenario will be the condition of this country after what I feel is an upcoming economic collapse. Remember, we are not a nation of savers, and we don’t have the social fabric that existed during the Great Depression. It could look a lot like present-day Mexico. If you think you would be safer without guns, just remember that Mexico outlaws gun possession, has only one gun shop in the entire country, yet has had more than 55,000 gun-related deaths within six years. That’s more victims than there were U.S. combat fatalities during the ten-year Vietnam War. The only ones with guns in Mexico are the outlaws and corrupt police. You just might want a good guy with a gun around.