Posted on 06/08/2022 8:30:42 PM PDT by lightman
As Americans debate gun control measures following the mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas, some politicians are using the tragedy to advance their agenda against firearms.
One day after the shooting, Democrats began using the tragedy as a vehicle to push for the types of policies they were already wanting. That effort was evident when Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) urged voters who want more strict gun control to vote for Democrats in the upcoming midterm elections.
Senate Democrats have failed to advance their wider-reaching federal gun control legislation by falling short of a 60-vote filibuster threshold, which is needed for bills to go to the floor for a vote.
Also on May 25, Schumer blocked legislation, known as the Luke and Alex School Safety Act, that supporters say could help prevent school shootings. The bill would require the Department of Homeland Security to establish a federal clearinghouse on the best school safety practices. The bill was introduced by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and two of his Republican colleagues in January 2021.
“@SenSchumer blocked this common-sense legislation in favor of his partisan agenda,” Johnson wrote on Twitter. In a separate tweet, he added, “Dems aren’t looking for solutions, they want wedge issues that they hope will keep them in power. Sick.”
For former President Barak Obama, it seemed more important for him to push his narratives surrounding racism than to condemn the Uvalde shooter.
“As we grieve the children of Uvalde today, we should take time to recognize that two years have passed since the murder of George Floyd under the knee of a police officer,” Obama wrote on Twitter.
“In the aftermath of his murder, a new generation of activists rose up to channel their anguish into organized action, launching a movement to raise awareness of systemic racism and the need for criminal justice and police reform.”
On June 2, President Joe Biden, in a speech on gun control, declared that the Second Amendment “is not absolute.” The National Rifle Association (NRA), rebuked the president’s speech, saying, “All that the President repeatedly proposes will only infringe on the rights of those law-abiding who have never, and will never, commit a crime.”
Gun Control
One of the main arguments of the gun control lobby is that people don’t need guns to defend themselves since the police protect them. Moreover, as many socialists would say, people don’t need guns because their government is their greatest protector.
However, history tells us that unarmed people can be defenseless if their governments turn against them. The most infamous example in history involves the Nazis, who used the weapons laws of the Weimar Republic to seize all the guns of the Jews before starting to murder them in 1941, which marked the start of The Holocaust.
There are several other examples in history. Turkey, which established gun control in 1911, murdered 1.5 million Armenians from 1915 to 1917. The Soviet Union, after abolishing private gun ownership in 1929, killed 20 million citizens in the years since, until 1953.
Likewise, the Chinese people have also become a defenseless population under tight gun curbs imposed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), whose former leader Mao Zedong once famously said, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.”
In the case of the Uvalde tragedy, school police Chief Pedro “Pete” Arredondo has come under heavy scrutiny and heavy criticism for his decision to follow a barricaded subject protocol instead of the protocol for an active shooter—thus delaying the police response by more than an hour. Steven McCraw, director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, has said that it was the “wrong decision” not to confront the shooter sooner.
Disarmament, nevertheless, is just one side of the equation—the side where the state seeks to impose a new social order by taking away people’s guns. The other side involves subverting a natural order that exists within all of us—namely morality—which manifests as self-restraint or self-control.
In the United States, the moral fabric of society is being destroyed, and people choose to act without morality—and for some, that means having no qualm about killing innocent school children.
Communist China serves as an alarming example of where Americans could end up if our country continues to head down its current path. The CCP destroyed the moral foundations of its society by launching the Cultural Revolution from 1966 to 1976, during which traditional ideas, culture, habits, and customs were branded “the Four Olds” and were eliminated.
But even after taking away people’s guns and destroying traditional morality, the Chinese regime has discovered that it still has a problem: It can only maintain social stability to the extent that it can control people using the powers of the state. In other words, the communist regime can only control people to the degree to which it can monitor people.
Police can respond to incidents, but they are reactive after a crime is committed. Typically, it’s going to take the police 15 minutes or more to respond. So the next step is preemption.
But the types of technologies you would need to preempt crime are things we wouldn’t want to live with, involving the monitoring of citizens’ every action.
RKBA ping.
Matthew the actor must have been lying to us. He had all the solutions at his press confab.
None of the voices today in Washington spoke about education. Only about guns, guns ,
I thought the libs had convinced the criminals to lay down their firearms.
Oh, that's a winning strategy, Upchuck. Definitely go with that!
They (the Dems) KNOW that! The school shootings are just a tool to them.
At the time of its enactment Amendment II was practically absolute.
Any person able to vote was well-to-do and probably quite sane and law abiding.
“We the people of the United States....”
In 1790 slaves could not vote or own guns as far as I know.
Perhaps teachers should educate their pupils to respect human life.
A gun can be as simple as a piece of metal with a hole.
Preloaded barrel changeable blunderbusses are possible.
School shootings are all about mental illness and psychotropic drugs. Throw in fatherless homes, neglect, social media. Is it any wonder?
Aye, and in a few cases add bullying to which school administration turned a blind eye and thought denial was a river in Egypt.
Why won’t gun control stop school shootings?
1. That is not its purpose. That purpose is to make owning and using firearms too expensive, too much of a PITA and too much of a potential civil and criminal liability that people (at least younger ones without the history with or attachment to guns) just decide to not buy or keep them; that, and registering every owner so that when the government decides to REALLY deny us our freedoms (as would be the case with getting rid of cash and replacing it with a central bank digital currency that could zero out everything one worked for over a lifetime in a millisecond), there will be so few willing and equipped to goppose them that it simply won’t matter.
2. Because the same people in favor of gun control - power-hungry pols or dim-witted useful idiots - are also in favor of abolishing traditional values and supplanting them with God-less materialism and the worship of pleasure.
3. Because those in favor of gun control simply refuse to allow schools to be physically (with barriers, etc.) or actively (with police, private guards or - gasp! - responsible parents and grandparents). See #1 for the explanation for that.
Gun Control= steady Hand and hitting what you are aiming at..
Because it didn't end it in countries with the strictest gun control. That's because gun control itself isn't about preventing violence. It's about controlling the masses. History has shown time and again that whenever the government want your guns, it's because they intend to do something to you that you will want to shoot them for.
Ping
Schools are already GUN FREE ZONES! If criminals followed law, schools would be the safest place in the USA.
dim-0s want to make it impossible to get a gun. Cant be done. A person can make his own gun if he really wants to.
With the US having about 50% of the world’s handguns, how long would it take to get rid of all of them? 50 years, 100? Mine are not going anywhere regardless of any new laws. Also of all gun crimes committed, 90% of them are with illegal guns. So any new gun restrictive laws will only make us 10%safer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.