The United States With No Second Amendment Rights

As has become obvious from my posts in the last few days about the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, gun violence in the U.S. and the impending gun control legislation, if you read between the lines there can be no mistake that the anti-gunners are coming for any type of gun they can get their hands on.

Unfortunately the anti-gun lobby has reached the tipping point where they feel they now have enough high-profile cases to stand on, especially after the shooting in Newtown, Connecticut involving young children. The most recent shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary has inflamed the anti-gun lobby beyond the point where they can contain themselves and they’re now licking their lips in the hopes of sliding through various gun laws even though the proposed “solutions” will have no effect on crime before the public can understand that these new legislative proposals will have no effect on mass shootings or gun crime.

While the tone of their language after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting in Newtown, Connecticut started with the popularly palatable idea that all measures would be looked at to reduce senseless violence, it quickly turned to an acute focus on guns and gun restrictions alone.

It’s become painfully obvious listening to the ineffective proposals tossed about by the current administration and being reported in the media that their true objective is not the safety of our children but rather a long-held effort to reduce gun owners’ rights to a mere fraction of what was intended by the founders of the United States. If at no other time or in no other statement, we were undeniably tipped off to this underlying mission when Senator Diane Feinstein mentioned the new legislation that will be pushed in Congress was the result of gun legislation that had been worked on for over a year—long before the Newtown, Connecticut tragedy.

Another clear indication that the actual safety of our schools and children is not the goal, is that the new gun proposals being put forth by the Obama administration will have little to no effect on the type of gun crime that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary in Connecticut, the Aurora Colorado shooting, or the Columbine massacre. All of the proposals being pushed at this time are simply a whitewash to hide the ugly reality.

At the beginning of his first term President Obama said he wanted to, “Fundamentally transform America.” When he said those words he intentionally left the details vague knowing the populace would tend to go along with that thought, at least since the uninformed had no idea how heavy his true socialist agenda was at the time.

Now we’re starting to see that one solid example of one of President Obama’s ways he would like to “fundamentally transform” the United States, is to rid the United States of the guns in the hands of the law abiding citizens. (Remember, criminals are exempt because they will always have that which is illegal).

As part of his push toward this fundamental change, his administration created a massive gun-running scheme to get guns in the hands of the Mexican drug cartels. What the anti-gun lobby doesn’t mention, and doesn’t want you to know, is that it was the Obama administration that ‘walked’ these guns across the border into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels. When these guns were used in crimes the idea was to be able to track them back to the United States to try and prove a point—hoping to show a correlation between our guns ending up in the hands of the criminals, and being able to blame the U.S. for being responsible for other countries’ gun problems.

Even though the facts of this operation-gone-bad are coming out, the anti-gun lobby still tries to site “…[U.S. guns] have made their way across the border to Mexico.” What they didn’t count on were the ramifications of that operation. One of the guns the Obama administration gave the Mexicans was used to kill our own border patrol agent, Brian Terry. This exposed the Obama administration’s “Operation Fast and Furious” gun running scheme resulting in the Obama administration’s Attorney General Eric Holder being found in contempt of Congress after refusing to hand over required documents about the failed operation. The inquiries into this fiasco have also seen President Obama claim executive privilege in order to keep documents regarding this operation-gone-bad from ever becoming known to the American public.

It isn’t much of a stretch now to see that absolute gun control is one of this administration’s ways he’s trying to make the United States a “fundamentally different” country than what we have always been. Of course those with this intent will state otherwise, but what choice do they really have if they are going to succeed in their mission?

Using gun tragedies like Sandy Hook in Newtown, Connecticut, Columbine, and the Aurora, Colorado movie theatre shootings as a way to play on Americans’ emotions during a time of weakness is nothing more than an unethical way for the anti-gun lobby and the politicians to dupe the public into believing what they are saying has at least a modicum of truth. Then they have the audacity to “warn” the American public that those in favor of the full and unfettered preservation of the Second Amendment will be trying to "trick" them into believing just the opposite of what the anti-gun lobby is saying.

What I’ve noticed after the recent tragedy at Sandy Hook is that those against the weakening of the Second Amendment remained silent in the beginning, waiting for the President to follow through on his promise to look at all possible reasons for the recent violence. It was only after the real issues were ignored and the onslaught of jabs were targeted at the guns and law-abiding gun owners that those in support of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution came forward to defend what they know to be so valuable for all citizens of the United States. The only other option the Second Amendment supporters have is unattractive—to stand idly by as the anti-gunners push there agenda through unopposed.

Gradualism is one of the most potent tools of the enemy. They have slowly been duping the masses about the true intent of our Second Amendment by gradually desensitizing them into more of the thinking of the world. There is no mistaking that the world government would love nothing more than ridding the U.S. of it’s Second Amendment rights. Just take a look at the sculpture that looms large at the U.N. Building. http://newyorkdailyphoto.com/nydppress/?p=542

The principles that once made this country great have become fodder for the anti-gun activists in the hope that the public is so uneducated that they will blindly go along.

The unfortunate picture of how the country will look without the full force of our Second Amendment is not pleasant. We’ve caught a glimpse of what we will become without the ability to defend ourselves during times of recent natural disasters such as Hurricane Sandy on the East Coast and the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.

In New York, anti-gun king Mayor Michael Bloomberg got a picture of his utopian world of no guns as looters and criminals ran wild in Brooklyn and other areas. The homeowners had no ability to meaningfully defend themselves during the chaos after Hurricane Sandy. Anyone trying to find water, or food better get home before dark or they may never make it home. Bloomberg wouldn’t even allow the National Guard to come into the city to protect he people—because, of course, the National Guard have guns!

In New Orleans the authorities unthinkably decided to confiscate guns from the law abiding citizens, leaving them victims to the merciless criminals roaming the streets and neighborhoods all day and all night.

Those against concealed carry at colleges love to point out the alarms or phones placed around the campus as reason not to have concealed carry. Ask the latest college campus rape victim if the attacker asked if she’d like him to get off of her for a minute so she could use the phone.

Even if the attackers are kind enough to let you call the police, the police do not prevent crime. The police show up after the crime to take notes and hopefully care enough to look for the bad guy, with no guarantee of finding or convicting the criminal. In some jurisdictions (Detroit and Oakland for example) it takes police as long as 24 to 30 minutes to respond to priority calls. There are cases where victims of crimes in progress never got a response from the police and were told an hour after the violator had fled that if the victim wanted to file a report she’d have to go to the police station to do so because the police were “too busy to send anyone.”

In Chicago, already ripe ground for criminals to create victims due to their practically no-gun laws, the police are no longer responding to robberies or car theft. As soon as the criminals figure this out what direction do you think the crime rate in these categories will go?

Are you willing to accept that type of protection? If you support the slow erosion of the Second Amendment that’s what you’ll end up with. This is why you’re not being told the high rate of violent crimes in the countries with the most strict gun control (multiples of the per capita crime rates in the United States). It would be hard for the anti-gun lobby to sell you their tall tales if you knew how violent our country will be should they succeed in disarming our law-abiding populace.

Even in the U.S. the reason for the high rates of violent crime in cities like Chicago, Washington D.C., etc, are because the most strict gun laws are already in effect. In these cities the criminals know they are the only ones bringing a gun to the party and the citizens going along with strict gun control have become their voluntary victims. As an opposite example, in cities such as Kennesaw, Georgia where gun ownership is mandatory, crime rates are negligible.

Remember, even if guns are outlawed, the outlaws will still have guns. If the police have guns they will be stolen by the criminals, or sold by corrupt cops to the criminals. The criminals will always have them, leaving the law-abiding citizens sitting ducks for those who are intent on doing harm.

You also need to get serious when someone suggests to you that all you need to do is spray the intruder in the eyes with oven spray, or to use some similar ludicrous method of self defense. That would be like hitting a Grizzly Bear with a pebble from a slingshot. All you’ll do is make him mad.

The “oven spray” information, like the anti-gun information, comes from the grossly uniformed or those who really aren’t concerned about your own safety. These people also have no idea about the mindset of a dedicated violent attacker. A dedicated attacker who has no regard for his own life will have much less regard for yours or anyone else’s. When someone is prepared to die for their cause there isn’t much you can do to prevent that person from acting and causing all sorts of collateral damage in his wake. All you can do is whatever it takes to defend yourself and your loved ones. Sometimes that means having, and knowing how to safely operate a firearm—not a can of oven spray.

I know it’s possible that the only way to change some people’s mind would be if God sent an armed intruder to your house in the middle of the night. You would perhaps realize at this point how much of a schmuck you have been for being duped by the anti-gun agenda as the criminal rapes your wife, abducts and molests your children—or worse. Unless you’re faster than a bullet from a criminal’s gun that is what you’ll be experiencing if you help the gun-grabbers dismantle the Second Amendment.

Thinking that “Just this one type of gun”, or “Just this one type of ammunition” should be banned is exactly what the anti-gun lobby wants you to think. It allows them to unravel the Second Amendment one thread at a time. Unfortunately it doesn’t end until there are no more “types.”

Make no mistake about it, those opposed to gun rights in the United States are coming for all the guns. If you don’t believe me, ask the citizens of the countries who had the rulers who convinced their citizens that gun control works—Stalin, Gaddafi, Castro, Mussolini, Hitler...

They know the only way to dismantle firearm ownership is in gradual increments, since trying to outright ban all guns would be political suicide. It’s starting this time with the exploitation of the shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary school in Newtown Connecticut. Don’t be fooled. Anyone armed with sensible information can see the “solutions” being proposed are not about the children or saving lives, it’s about coming for all the guns the best way they know how. The ideas for saving the lives of more innocent children were quickly scrapped in order to take on a much easier sell—stripping the American citizens of their God-given right to self defense.

My hope is that our great nation wakes up to the depth of the subtlety of the anti-gun proponents before we’re swallowed by violence with no way to defend ourselves in a meaningful way. The politicians who are always able to have armed body guards can’t possibly be thinking clearly about unarmed citizens’ safety. You need to think for yourself. Those who have blindly gone along with the rest of the uninformed will soon find themselves in the position when (not if) they need someone to come to their rescue. At that point they will have no choice when asking who is to blame but to walk straight to the nearest mirror, look that person squarely in the eyes, point directly at the culprit, and say in no uncertain terms, “Me.”

For those who still refuse to even consider what I’ve written in the previous articles there is apparently no convincing you otherwise at this point. And for those same people, I acknowledge and respect your decision to be a victim instead of the victor should you ever encounter that masked man in the middle of the night, in an alley, in your home, or in your car.

There is still one thing I will ask of those who choose to be the victims. I request of the anti-gun individuals that you please don’t make the decision for others who choose to be able to fight and live. Please stay out of the conversations when you are uninformed. If you’ve never shot a firearm, if you dislike firearms only because of what you hear from the media or from others who regurgitate what they hear on the media, please stay out of the decision-making process. The greatest harm to this country comes from within—from the uninformed trying to make decisions that effect everyone else’s life.