The Federal government is afraid. In addition to whatever the Pentagon is up to for the military, the Federal government is ordering billions (with a B) of rounds of pistol ammunition, has built ‘internment’ camps around the country, stocked up on coffins and is training the U.S. Army in Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, Houston,and other cities. Congress passed approval to arrest and imprison citizens without charge and hold them indefinitely with no due process or supervision. Obviously, the Feds fear.
Now, they’re on a full court press to disarm the public to the extent possible, waving the dead bodies of school kids as their claimed motive. Oddly, the true killers of schoolkids, nutcases, get a free pass here: it’s the normal citizens’ guns being pursued. The weapons that is, of those who don’t use them on schoolkids. Why does the government want law-abiding citizens disarmed while knowing that criminals and nutcases will be unaffected? If outlawing something people want would actually remove it from society, we wouldn’t have a drug problem, right? And Prohibition would never have been repealed. But it does remove the traditionally armed U.S. public.
Why is the U.S. public ‘traditionally armed,’ anyway? Whose idea was that? As most know, it was set up in the Second Amendment to the Constitution by the Founders. Reading their writings tells us that they did it for the same reasons Thomas Jefferson included in the Declaration of Independence:
“…that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government,…”
Additional reasons included provision of needed militia, self defense, hunting etc. The Founders main concern though, was their revolution, which they knew the Brits wouldn’t accept without a fight. Unarmed citizens can’t fight. With their profound distrust of government, they wished to assure the ability to fight for the future they were trying to protect with their Constitution. If anyone expects the U.S. government to react differently than did the Brits, consider Lincoln’s reaction to the secession of the South… and go back and reread the first paragraph of this post.
Federal gun control has a history; the government has been after the public’s firepower for a while, see-sawing back and forth as the public mood has changed. It seems clear that without the Second Amendment, the public would have been disarmed before today and the attempts continue whenever opportunity appears.
So, just as our politicians ignore the need to reduce their profligate spending, (we don’t credit lip service here) they ignore the realities of the ‘crises’ they kidnap to foster their pursuit of the armed public. Realities include criminals with more guns than they can use, a bunch of which were provided recently by the U.S. Department of Justice, and nutcase killers of innocents left to run around ignored while the chase is on to disarm the citizens who haven’t killed anyone.
If there is any justification for the Federal Fears behind the described current policies, who will protect the law-abiding citizens from the events from which the government wishes to protect itself? Even today, we see Home Invasion stories; if things reach the conditions the government seems to expect, citizens are likely to need to defend themselves as much as government.
The worst of all this seems to be the inherent corruption we now appear to accept in our politics. Our leaders of either party barely bother to conceal their dishonesty, lie to us and no longer even pretend to put the common weal at the head of their motivations, as it seems to this writer. Order is breaking down; we have besides home invasions, groups of teens prowling the public streets to attack innocents and mobbing stores to steal and smash things. Whoever wishes to go ahead from here unarmed, feel free to do so but kindly refrain from making my decisions for me, using government force.