Gun control is a deception
After hearing the standard progressive view of firearms since the Newtown, Conn., shooting, I’m having trouble deciding if this view comes from a basic inability to make abstract connections, a stubborn refusal to try, or a conscious effort to deceive.
But momentarily leaving aside the part each may play, I could actually empathize with such a blind and obstinate antipathy toward the very existence of firearms only if there were two hard realities. The first being that there’s never been a case in our history of a gun, in non-police and military hands, being used to save a life or stop a crime. Secondly, all those who have perished in acts of violence since our founding, can blame a gun for it.
Common sense should tell one that neither could be true. Yet for many, such facts don’t seem to compute. Guns are evil incarnate and can’t be anything else. But you can give the benefit of the doubt to this position only so long before you have to consider outright deceit.
I consider gun control as simply a back-door way to disarm the general populace so as to make them unable to resist the tyrannical state. Which is why the founders thought the right to bear arms so important, as the taste of tyranny was still very fresh.
I’ll put it another way. If I were a despot in sheep’s clothing, and knew I couldn’t openly separate the people from their firearms, I’d do it deceitfully. Either by getting them to think they had no real need for them, that they were too irresponsible with them, or just, plain make them frightened of them. Ironically, I’m seeing these notions being expressed in the gun control movement.