Last
week the nation witnessed two prime examples of the absolute failures of gun
control. Florida has been bragging about the success
of their red flag gun laws which enable authorities to deny gun owners any
rights to due process if they have been identified as being “a threat to
themselves or others.” Under many of the red flag laws appearing across the nation,
a simple allegation from a neighbor, coworker, or family member is all it takes
to have your guns confiscated. It is then up to the accused to prove in a court
of law, that they are not dangerous and have no intention of causing any harm
with their firearms. Red flag gun laws have been passed in fifteen states since
President Trump expressed his support for them. It was the green light
signaling it was ok to confiscate guns.
The
truth is that Florida’s red flag laws are an abysmal failure, as is all gun
control. Since their passage in 2018, red flag laws have been used to
confiscate guns from over seventeen hundred people. The problem is that they
have no way of knowing whether these people posed any real danger to society.
In the meantime, murderers are still committing murder. For example, just over
a month ago a seventeen
year old boy was shot and killed by a suspect who is still unidentified and
on the loose. There isn’t a gun control law that would have prevented that. Red
flag laws, as is the case with all gun control, only affects the law abiding.
On
Thursday, December fifth, a high-speed chase ended in Miramar with a shoot out
between Florida law enforcement and two armed robbers. The suspects were both
convicted felons who were imprisoned on multiple armed robbery charges and released
in 2017. They
were in possession of two handguns. Why are dangerous criminals being
released from prison while innocent people are having their guns
unconstitutionally confiscated on mere speculation? That is a question no one
is asking. On Friday, December sixth, a foreign national and member of the Saudi
Arabian military opened fire on a U.S. Navy installation in Florida, killing
three and wounding seven others. How did a member of a foreign military obtain
a handgun? Isn’t it against the law for foreigners to possess firearms in the
United States? We do know that the democrats refused to add any provisions to
existing gun control legislation that would notify
ICE of any foreigners attempting to buy firearms. Thankfully that did not
become law but maybe they felt sorry for him and helped him out. It must be
difficult to get flight training in such a white privileged, oppressive nation
like America.
Red
flag laws are not about public safety. They are a convenient excuse to
confiscate firearms from everyday people. The real intentions of gun grabbers
are becoming clearer as more states are attempting to pass laws which can only
be described as absolute tyranny. Virginia is one example where they are attempting
to make felons out of anyone that has anything to do with second amendment
activities. In New York, they are attempting to pass a law which would allow tyrants
to deny
gun purchases based on bias in social media posts. If they were really
concerned about public safety, felons convicted multiple times of armed robbery
would not be released from prison so easily. It is also abundantly clear that they
intend to confiscate guns from people who they deem to be unaligned with their
political objectives.
Passing
more gun control laws will do nothing to save lives because those seeking to
pass them are not being honest about their intentions. They lie and hide their
true objectives by claiming that they support the second amendment and are only
seeking common sense laws. They know that what they are proposing will have no
affect on criminals yet, they are willing to pass them anyway because it is
about control, not safety. They have objectives and an armed population is an
obstacle. They have no morals or principles, they are only driven by their
agenda.
Alinsky
writes on the morality of means and ends in Rules for Radicals. He
mocks those that believe in traditional Christian morality by saying that
corrupted means do not corrupt the ends and that believing in such a concept or
being unwilling to corrupt yourself means you do not care about society.
In action, one does not
always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent both with one’s
individual conscience and the good of mankind. The choice must always be for
the latter. Action is for mass salvation and not for the individual’s personal
salvation. He who sacrifices the mass good for his personal conscience has a
peculiar conception of personal salvation; he doesn’t care enough for the
people to be corrupted for them (Alinsky, 1971).
This
is the mentality that we are we dealing with. They know they are lying; they
know their laws will not stop violent crime, they just don’t care because they
believe they know what is best for us. They believe that they are creating a
more just and equal society and that is their moral high ground. Whatever they must
do to achieve it is fair game because they have convinced themselves of their
own greatness. If they must lie and endure the failures of gun control until
the one perfect law that fixes everything comes to fruition, they will. The
problem is that it will never come. Things will only get worse, and no matter
how many gun laws they pass murderers
will still murder, even if it isn’t with a gun. This is because corrupted
means will inevitably corrupt the ends. How could they not?
David Risselada: "[C]orrupted means will inevitably corrupt the ends."
ReplyDeleteIndeed! Indicting the Second Amendment itself!
Had the 18th-century founding fathers not replaced the non-optional Biblical responsibility to bear arms in defense of ourselves, our families, and others with the optional Enlightenment right to do so there would be no Red Flag laws or any of the other gun control measures enacted since the adoption of the Second Amendment.
America was sold down the river when the 18th-century founding fathers replaced Biblical responsibilities (based upon the Bible's immutable moral laws) with Enlightenment rights, and nothing demonstrates it better than the Second Amendment.
Think about it: The Amendment WITH the wording "shall not be infringed" is the MOST infringed, licensed, and limited Amendment of the entire twenty seven. Furthermore, a future generation of our posterity is likely to see the Second Amendment whittled away entirely or repealed altogether. This is inherent nature and danger of optional Enlightenment rights versus non-optional Biblical responsibilities, such as the following:
"Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a twoedged sword [or today's equivalent] in their hand ... this honor have all his saints. Praise ye Yah." (Psalm 149:6-9)
"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house [beginning with spiritual and physical protection], he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." (1 Timothy 5:8)
For more, listen to "The Second Amendment: A Knife in a Gunfight," delivered at the Springfield, Missouri Firearms and Freedom Symposium, at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/#FeaturedMessages
At this same location, you will also find a radio interview Larry Pratt (Executive Director of Gun Owners of America) conducted with me on this same subject. I think you'll find Mr. Pratt's remarks especially interesting.
See also Chapter Twelve "Article 2: Constitutional vs. Biblical Self-Defense" of free online book "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at https://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt12.html
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYou certainly bring a lot to the table and in many ways, I agree with you. Unfortunately there are far too many people that will simply not know where to go with the information you are providing, which is definitely one of the problems. I think sometimes though that you have to approach this from a point that people do understand and despite our constitution not being perfect, it is the one we have and it is the best in the world. While other countries have been thoroughly disarmed we have not. I do agree with you that people should abandon the concept of rights and start thinking in terms of responsibility because without it, freedom cannot exist. I also did an interview with Larry Pratt. It's on this page somewhere.
ReplyDeleteGot a rabid anti-gun friend. He admits no law will stop evil. Yet he still want more gun kontrol. Cuz feelings or something. No matter how much I explain laws restricting self-defense will only effect those inclined to follow the law, he doesn't care or understand it or both. Its almost like explaining String Theory to a string.
ReplyDelete