We have been hearing a lot of talk from prominent politicians and progressive figures about the need to do something to limit gun ownership. But what they really mean is, we need to do something to get these guns away from the peasants, because all these silly serfs got this dangerous idea that they should be able to defend themselves. This should be quite obvious based on the fact that Obama and his entire family are protected 24 hours a day, 7 days a week by highly trained men with guns. Does the fact that us common folk can’t afford highly trained men with guns mean that we are out of luck, and cannot defend ourselves with our own guns? Well that doesn’t seem very fair and equal, now does it?
Michael Moore shares this view, that only the elite deserve to defend themselves. In 2005 a body guard named Patrick Burke who was employed by Moore was arrested in a New York airport after declaring at a ticket counter that he had a gun. Although he was licensed to carry in Florida and California, New York does not recognize those permits. So while Michael Moore goes around spouting anti-gun propaganda, he uses an armed guard for protection. So obviously Moore understands the need to protect oneself, and the advantage one gains in regards to self defense from carrying a firearm. He just doesn’t want regular old bumpkins like us to protect ourselves.
Much truth was spoken in jest when Obama joked that “One of the main incentives of running was continued Secret Service protection so we can have men with guns around at all times”. It’s not a joke because having men with guns around to protect his daughter means she is safer. At any given time there are probably tens of guns within 50 feet of his daughters, but this makes Obama feel safer because the guns will be used to protect them. What parent would not want their child to be constantly protected? But the fact is, the 99% cannot afford that, so to take away our means of defending ourselves and protecting our family, is nothing to joke about. Obama’s daughters’ school has 11 armed guards according to this Breitbart.com article.
The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak.
If you dismiss this by saying, “Of course they have armed guards — they get Secret Service protection,” then you’ve missed the larger point.
The larger point is that this is standard operating procedure for the school, period. And this is the reason people like NBC’s David Gregory send their kids to Sidwell, they know their kids will be protected from the carnage that befell kids at a school where armed guards weren’t used (and weren’t even allowed).
Shame on President Obama for seeking more gun control and for trying to prevent the parents of other school children from doing what he has clearly done for his own. His children sit under the protection guns afford, while the children of regular Americans are sacrificed.
And now, coming from the Senate, is a comprehensive gun control bill sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein to ban “the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high capacity ammunition feeding devices”. It goes on to specify 120 specifically banned guns, and strengthen the 1994 assault weapons ban. And here’s where a healthy distrust of government should come in. Some high capacity guns are grandfathered in so that no one owning one of these newly banned guns at the time of the ban will have to give up their gun–yet. The grandfather provision requires a gun registry of all banned guns under the National Firearms Act, including the type of gun, serial number, photo id of the owner, fingerprints of the owner, and “dedicated funding for the ATF to implement registration”–quite obviously, criminals will not register their guns.
In 1929 Joseph Stalin implemented strict gun control in Soviet Russia, and proceeded to murder at least 20 million Soviets over the next 25 years. On November 11, 1938 Regulations Against Jews’ Possession of Weapons was passed in Nazi Germany, effectively depriving Jews of the right to possess, sell, or make any weapons or firearms. In the following six years 6 million Jews would be murdered by Hitler–just think of all the lives that would have been saved if every murdered Jew had taken out one Nazi.
You are probably thinking one of two things. You are either the person who already agrees that we cannot trust government, and therefore are equally appalled at the gun registry. Or, as soon as I mentioned Hitler, you tuned out, preferring to believe that our government could never have bad intentions–or that good intentions could never become atrocities. While I agree that we are a far cry from a Nazi-style government, it is through a vigilant citizenry that we can ensure instead of just trust that our government would never do something evil. Therefore the people’s basic right to defend themselves against aggressors is undermined by a firearm registry where the most powerful possible aggressor–the government–has knowledge and power over your means and ability to defend yourself.
Yesterday’s post was about a grim reminder to distrust the government, in the form of a note slipped into Halloween decorations made in China. The note claimed to be from an inmate of a reeducation through labor camp where political dissidents are sent in China. So there are people today all over the world who would benefit from the ability to defend themselves against an oppressive government. I also mentioned how only 67 years ago American citizens of Japanese descent were put in concentration camps by the American government. And the fact that the NDAA for the last two years has included clauses allowing for the indefinite detainment of American citizens on American soil, without due process should be a red flag to us all that we should not trust our government. America was founded on the principal of distrust in government, and that is healthy.
There was a New York paper the Journal News which recently published an interactive map of gun permit holders in two New York counties. This was a perfect example of irresponsible media creating danger for innocent citizens. Some of those permit holders were battered women who are hiding from stalkers and exes, and have now had their names and addresses revealed–should their guns be taken away, so that when an abuser shows up at their house, undeterred by police, she cannot defend herself? What that map also did was identify perfect crime targets–any area without guns. Now criminals can look at that map, and pick a house where they are guaranteed not to get shot while robbing, raping, home invading, or murdering. I was happy to see that a blogger, Christopher Fountain, quickly turned the tables on the newspaper, publishing an interactive map of the employees of the newspaper, complete with photos and address. Cross reference that with the gun permit map, and a criminal can find a perfect victim for whatever kind of crime he wishes to carry out. I would guess that a few of those exposed employees may feel targeted enough to want to protect themselves; maybe a few are out buying guns right now.