About this time one week ago, the news about a shooting at an Elementary school in the small town of Newtown, Connecticut was first breaking. At the time, no one but those who were there and the first responders truly knew the magnitude of the situation.
One thing was for sure though – gun control would become the topic of discussion very soon.
Hardly did I or anyone else know, within moments of the news breaking worldwide, that liberal pundits and those who are pro-gun control began to spin a terrible tragedy into a few political shenanigans as they blamed the guns for killing innocent people.
However, it wasn’t the guns that were used. It was a 20 year-old man named Adam Lanza – a very crazed and abnormal man.
Needless to say, America was about to succumb to the narrative that we had faced each and every time a tragedy of this magnitude occurs.
Gun Control.
Oh, how I hate the term “gun control”. I hate that people want to blame the guns for killing 27 innocent people. I hate that the president wants to take our guns away; and in doing so, he has created a task force to “solve the problem of gun violence in America” headed by none other than the magnificent Joe “I’m a walking gaffe” Biden.
Let’s get a few things straight, shall we?
First, it wasn’t guns that murdered 27 innocent people; it was a single man with free-will to do so. We all should be blaming him, and not the guns. It’s called personal responsibility – something our society lacks to a great deal.
Secondly, every shooting tragedy that I can remember has happened in a gun-free-zone. Now, shouldn’t this tell us something?
Criminals who are dead-set on going on a shooting rampage aren’t going to go shoot up a police station. Why? Because THEY ALL HAVE GUNS AND WILL DEFEND THEMSELVES.
A gun-free school would make a perfect target because no one on campus has a gun, especially if it’s a place like an elementary school where resource officers are not likely to be present, unlike at a Middle or High School.
Let me be clear: Saturday afternoon, when the reports of the heroics of the staff at the school were first surfacing, it was told that the principal of the school and the school psychologist were the first two people to make contact with Lanza.
Now, if either of them would have had a weapon and were properly trained on how to use that weapon to defend themselves and the children at the school, I strongly feel like the only person who would have died at that school would have been Lanza himself.
So what am I proposing?
I would like teachers at every school in the country to be packing heat. Not every teacher of course, but possibly something like one handgun and one assault rifle per 50 students. Also, it would have to be known that the campus is not a gun-free zone. Most likely, this would probably deter any possible shootings at schools ever again.
Now, my AP European teacher told me that he wouldn’t feel comfortable carrying a weapon at school because there is a chance that students could jump and disarm him. I offered him a very simply solution: If you are conceald-carrying correctly, no one but you should know that you are carrying. Therefore, the likelihood of you being jumped for your weapon is very, very low. It would be like playing Russian Roulette with the teachers.
I said in part 1 that I wouldn’t be discussing the ramifications of gun control in our country, and I have stuck to that. I offered a solution to the problem of gun violence in American schools, and I wish that a narrative like the one I have offered would be discussed more than gun control.
My next column will probably be on gun control in America. However, I am leaving today to head out to New Mexico to spend time with family that I so rarely see. This being said, my next column will probably not be for another 10 days.
If this is the case, I would like to wish everyone a very Merry Christmas. I hope that joy is brought to each and every one of you this Christmas season.
God Bless you, God Bless Newtown, and God Bless America.
Photo credit: Rev. Xanatos Satanicos Bombasticos (ClintJCL) (Creative Commons)
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
This will end the power of the Central Federal government and it is soooo simple . .. . no more IRS, EPA, Court made laws . . Power back to the States and to the people. DC with no money has no power and this amendment will put them back in the Original box of Article I section 8 enumerated powers without the expanded use of the Courts and clauses. the States would have the powers of the tenth amendment restored.
This was used to repeal the 18th amendment -
Amendment 21 – 18th Amendment Repealed
Back | Table of Contents | Next>>
1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.
3. The article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
Notes for this amendment:
Proposed 2/20/1933
Ratified 12/5/1933
History
Amendment 28 – 14th, 16th and 17th Amendment Repealed
1. The fourteenth, the sixteenth, and the seventeenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
2. The article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
http://tinyurl.com/cbu2ho3
You’re sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way.
With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it. In the darkness, you make out two shadows. One holds something that looks like a crowbar.
When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside. As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you’re in trouble.
In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours was never registered.
Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm. When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter.
“What kind of sentence will I get?” you ask. “Only ten-to-twelve years,” he replies, as if that’s nothing. “Behave yourself, and you’ll be out in seven.”
The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you’re portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can’t find an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both “victims” have been arrested numerous times.
But the next day’s headline says it all:
“Lovable Rogue Son Didn’t Deserve to Die.”
The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters. As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.
Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he’ll probably win. The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you’ve been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects.
After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.
A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven’t been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you. Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn’t take long for the jury to convict you of all charges. The judge sentences you to life in prison.
This case really happened.
On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk, England, killed one burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term.
How did it become a crime to defend one’s own life in the once great British Empire?
It started with the Pistols Act of 1903.
This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns.
Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.
Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerfordmass shooting in 1987.
Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw. When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.
The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of “gun control”, demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)
Nine years later, at Dunblane, Scotland, Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.
For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearms still owned by private citizens.
During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.
Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying, “We cannot have people take the law into their own hands.”
All of Martin’s neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.
When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities. Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn’t were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn’t comply. Police later bragged that they’d taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.
How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been registered and licensed. Kind of like cars. Sound familiar?
WAKE UP AMERICA ; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION.
“..It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds.”
–Samuel Adams
You had better wake up, because Obama is doing this very same thing, over here, if he can get it done. The UN Small Arms Treaty that Hilary is negotiating would take away our 2nd Amendment rights. And there are stupid people in congress and on the street that will go right along with him.
You are quite knowledgeable, I am very impressed..!
Now I must get my video ready & bash the lying dyke Hillary.. don’t mean to be facetious, just that people seem to respond to a bit of humor, would prefer a 2×4 but am not close enough..
Here is how you stop Obama and the DC power and money grabbers – this ends their power and takes away the purse – give all back to the individuals and the States.
AMENDMENT 28 – 14TH, 16TH AND 17TH AMENDMENT REPEALED
1. The fourteenth, the sixteenth, and the seventeenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States are hereby repealed.
2. The article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
It takes 38 State legislature to pass the amendment in the legislature and then it must be re-voted on in the ratifying process and upon the signing of the 38th State Legislature to ratify, it becomes the law of the land.
It appears to be the last stand before the Jefferson solution is used. . .
I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. – Letter to James Madison (30 January 1787) Thomas Jefferson
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere. – Letter to Abigail Smith Adams (22 February 1787 Thomas Jefferson
And comrade Kerry will give it a big push after ole Hil leaves the building.
I still have not heard ONE person tell the public how gun control will stop mass murder or bring crime rate down. Never has..never will!!!
A weapon, arm, or armament is a tool or instrument used in order to inflict damage, harm or death to enemies or other living beings, structures, or systems. Weapons are used to increase the efficacy and efficiency of activities such as hunting, crime, law enforcement, and warfare. In a broader context, weapons may be construed to include anything used to gain a strategic, material or mental advantage over an adversary. Any instrument/object when used to cause bodily harm is an assault weapon. Water, sound, electricity can be also used as a weapon to assault.
There were weapons, murders and killings long before there were guns.
A person could take 3 guns that hold only six rounds each and take out up to 18 people. How does banning assault weapon stop people from killing? It DOESN”T!!! All it does is cause a person to come up with another plan.
Do people really think that banning what will be determined as assault weapons would have stopped the killers from accomplishing their task or obtaining a gun on the black market? Banning assault weapons will make the price go up on the black market.
When they advertise a drug on TV they have to mention the side effects. There are some we are warned in rare cases can cause a person to have suicidal thoughts. How do we know these people who get suicidal thoughts decide to take a bunch of people with them. Look how many killed themselves after their killing spree. So we blame the gun not the medication. Why not ban drugs that alter a person thought patterns. I think every US citizen should have a gun and law enforcement classes to teach people how to use them.
If the every teacher at the school had a gun and knew how to use there would have been less people killed, because someone could have taken him out.
If assault weapons were were banned it would not have stopped him. Maybe slowed him down. A person does not need an assault weapon to commit mass murder!
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/07/aurora_shooting_how_did_people_commit_mass_murder_before_automatic_weapons_.html
http://www.neontommy.com/news/2012/07/doing-math-guns
To say banning assault weapons will stop mass murders or stopping a person from killing is ridiculous!!!
So the guy walks in with a ninja’s sword and starts hacking kids heads off or learns how to make a chlorine gas bomb and tosses it in the window.The nutjob will find a way! A guy in china slashed and killed 28 kids in a school with a knife. So yes,if someone is determined to do evil they will do evil with whatever method they can get their hands on.That is the reality of it.