Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Gun control…

For some it’s about taking advantage of tragedy and belittling those they hate. I almost didn’t include this first story due to the inherently bigotry and low-brow “journalism” behind it. Still, here it is. A woman in Texas, a self-described Second Amendment proponent and gun owner, committed an atrocious crime (the facts of which I don’t have and don’t want) – she apparently murdered her own daughters after an argument. The woman was also shot and killed by the police. Three women dead for no good reason – terrible.

Enter Helen Thompson writing on American News X. Thompson offered up an assessment of the crime in terms both racist and anti-Christian.

Too bad for Christian Christy Byrd Sheats two daughter’s, 17 and 22, Sheats had a gun with which to “protect her family.” That gun was used to gun down both girls in the street after a family argument.

Sheats was then killed by police after refusing to drop her weapon, literally bringing home the insanity of the famed phrase “from my cold, dead, hands.”

Note the immediate description of the shooter as a Christian. Would Thompson dare describe a Muslim terrorist as a Muslim terrorist? I think not. I did a quick Googling of “Helen Thompson” and “Muslim” and the first thing I saw was Thompson berating Donald Trump for trying to “initiate a Muslim witch hunt”. I guess witch hunts aren’t even for witches anymore – just Christians.

Thompson continues:

This woman appears to be the poster child of white, GOP America. She praised her religion, loved veterans and country music, praised Ronnie Reagan and George W., and loved her guns. She was a Texas resident, originally from Alabama. This woman literally reeked of right wing Americana — of normal, gun-loving life. She loved her grandmother, had been bitten by a black widow, and basically, seemed to love life and her children.

The white America. Would Thompson ever write about one of the thousands of murders committed by blacks each year (47% of total murders vs. 10% of the population)? No. It’s just a white, Christian, all-American kind of thing. Y’all wouldn’t understand.

Thompson didn’t even call for more gun control beyond her ridicule. “No good guy with a gun stopped this senseless murder by a ‘good guy’ with a gun,” she ranted – what a tired, worn, anecdotal, and worthless “argument”. If not even true in this case – the police officer “good guy” used a gun to stop the white, Christian bad gal.

Maybe some of the problems the left has with guns in America comes more from a hatred of America and its people than from a hatred of guns. These cretins, seething in their hatred, want the government to disarm all the white Christians – and everyone else of decent persuasion.

I have no use for the government at all. Some people on “my side” do. Droves of my friends boast about obtaining their concealed carry permits. Actress Kelly McGillis just joined the ranks of the permitted carriers following an attack at her North Carolina home.

I like that they have armed themselves in a world seemingly gone mad but I do not like the way they have done it. Why a permit from the state? I know it’s the law in most places. I understand that. Most people who get the permits are law-abiding. It’s a law that shouldn’t be abided by – or exist. Why should there be permits for the exercise of the right to carry anyway? Rights do not require permission slips.

I sympathize with and applaud Mrs. McGillis’s decision to arm and defend herself. I found it odd though that she took the measure following a home invasion. North Carolina does not require a permit of any kind to defend oneself at one’s home. I realize she obviously wants protection outside her house too. Thus the permit. And, thus, my problem.

Running to the government for permission to protect one’s life is little different in my mind to running to the government to prohibit others from protecting themselves. Either way, the government is not the answer. Usually, it’s the problem.

In a sense everyone wants reasonable “gun control”. Some, like Thompson, would have the state “control” guns by banning them from white, Christian hands at least. Gun owners generally favor the responsible, personal “control” of the individual firearm. If, to them, that means acquiescing to a state law, then they do it. Either way it’s the state, the state, the state. How about some gun control for the state itself?

In addition to regulating firearms, the government has a long history of widely distributing them, usually with terrible consequences. Most of government works like that – they find a small problem and come up with a solution that creates a bigger problem. I suppose it justifies their existence. I don’t see the need.

A few years ago the ATF was caught red-handed selling and then giving guns to Mexican drug cartels and to criminals. Some of those guns came back, fast and furious, and were used to kill Americans. The ATF isn’t alone. They are novices compared to the CIA. The “intelligence” agency has taken to giving arms to Syrian “rebels”. Many of those weapons were stolen and ended up on the black market – gun show of choice for terrorists. And, you guessed it, some of those arms have killed Americans. By arming one side (maybe more) of this conflict which does not concern the U.S. the government helps generate more angry “refugees” who then migrate to the West for various purposes – some for aid and reflief, others for revenge and crime. Little problem, “solution”, bigger problems.

Government agent Joe Biden oversees “gun control” while exploiting “loopholes” at a Jordanian gun show. NYT.

The left tries to scare people with stories of white, Christian Americans wielding automatic assault rifles and rocket launchers. They want the government to do something about it despite the fact it isn’t a problem. The government does do something! It supplies “Kalashnikov assault rifles, mortars and rocket-propelled grenades” to rebels and then to the black market and to terrorists. Nice, huh?

Another of the left’s arguments for more government control is that the firearms available when the Second Amendment was ratified were flintlocks and thus those are the only ones the people are entitled to keep and bear. By that logic, shouldn’t the CIA be running muskets and not rocket launchers? Maybe people like Thompson should limit their writing to quill pens. All beside the point.

How about less government for a change? How about limiting or banning the state’s use of firearms (and rockets and grenades)? Might that make for a safer society? As is, they give us freedom control, crime, war, mindless intervention, black markets, and terrorism; all that in addition to rules, regulations, taxes, inflation, oppression, etc. More government, more crime. Why have it or its controls?