I’m going to try here not to turn into one of those onion-on-my-belt get-off-my-lawn curmudgeons, but I have a feeling that it is doomed to failure. I have been watching some of the responses since the church shooting in Texas, and I have to wonder if older generations looked at the younger generations like I am looking at the current generation, or if it has reached a new low. But when I look at this generation, bathed in self-entitlement and living in a bubble of their own concerns. I know that my generation had some issues, but never to the level that we are seeing now, where the attitude seems to be “screw the greater good or what everybody else wants. I want what I want, and if you don’t agree to give it to me, you are my enemy.” This is a source of much of the division today, which is being encouraged by the political elite, who are taking a “divide and conquer” style of leadership, as well as the divisiveness of the mainstream media.
Look at the reactions to the election. People think they should have their own way regardless of what the majority thinks. Hence you see people trying to overthrow President Trump, through riots and a special prosecutor who is obviously in a conflict of interest and on a witch hunt, after a year of investigating; you have opposition members of congress who are floating articles of impeachment, even though there has been no crime committed. I refer to this as Participation Trophy Syndrome. Over the last 30 years or so, if you participated in an activity, just by participating, you received a so-called participation trophy, just so no one felt left out. So what was the fallout of this? Achievement was downplayed at best, or outright discouraged at worst. You were looked down upon for working harder to succeed (e.g. white privilege), or if you were successful, you were expected to share their success with those around you. Those around them were thus not driven to succeed on their own, they felt they could “ride on the coat tails” of the successful. Look at the millenials today, who think that the rich should pay a higher percentage of taxes because they “can afford it,” and fund their free healthcare and free education, so they can get out and earn a lot of money. When I was growing up, this had a name — Socialism.
Let’s look at one of the current hot-button issues, gun control. At the time of this writing, we are a 6 weeks beyond a gunman shooting up a concert in Las Vegas, in what is, to date, the deadliest “mass shooting” in American history, in which 58 people were killed. (Personally, I think that many were trampled, and that a relatively few were actually killed by gunfire, but that is my own opinion, and the police have not stated this, they are too busy changing the basic facts of the shooting…) Then this past Sunday, a lunatic walked into a church with an AR-15 and started shooting, and killed 26 people. Before the crime scene had even been investigated and the bodies removed, people in Hollywood and liberals everywhere were mocking prayer and calling for gun control. Noted secular humanist Wil Wheaton’s savage twitter attack on Speaker Ryan’s call to pray for the families and victims:
The murdered victims were in a church. If prayers did anything, they’d still be alive, you worthless sack of shit
Teen Vogue writer Lauren Duca and other liberals said the same thing, many pointing out the need for “common sense gun control.” Even country artist Tim McGraw spouted off to that effect.
Look, I’m a bird hunter — I love to wing-shoot,However, there is some common sense that’s necessary when it comes to gun control. They want to make it about the Second Amendment every time it’s brought up. It’s not about the Second Amendment.
Let’s take a look at that. Given the circumstances in which it was framed, the 2nd amendment is common sense gun control. The 2nd amendment was framed by the Founding Fathers in a time when they were fighting against the British, as well as to protect America against a tyrannical government (like the one that the progressive socialists want to see implemented). Everybody had guns, because if you didn’t have a gun, you didn’t hunt, and if you didn’t hunt, you didn’t eat. Historically, actions like the the Battle of Athens in 1946 prove the intent and the efficacy of the 2nd Amendment.
And now, fast forward 70 years. The governor of California wants to see people who don’t believe the way he wants them to about global warming^H^H^H^H climate change to be forced into brainwashing. Senator Dianne Feinstein is lovingly crafting legislation to outlaw every weapon that she and her ilk consider and “assault weapon.” And that is only a stopgap until she can figure out how to take them all from us. News flash, Dianne. Assault is a behavior not a device. Which is to say that anything can be classified as an assault weapon. If I maliciously cut someone with my pocketknife, that knife is an assault weapon. If I use my car to run someone off the road, my car is an assault weapon. If I throw a rock at someone, you guessed it, the rock is the assault weapon. And conversely, none of my guns have ever been fired in anger, so technically, even though I may own semi-automatic, magazine fed rifles and pistols, by definition, they are not assault weapons, since none of them have been used in an assault. So, Timmy, it is all about the Second Amendment. We’d better protect it, or it is going to get stolen from us.
The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
– Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776
“Crazy uncle Joe” Biden, who apparently is throwing sound bites out there to attempt to position himself to run for president, has come out and said that he would rather have more people die in mass shootings than to have someone use a legally owned so-called “assault weapon.” Still think it’s not about the second amendment, Tim? Still think the gun control people care one iota about the People beyond extending their power?
Now let’s look at some hard numbers. The anti-gun line up and say how horrible the gun numbers are. I am not taking deaths lightly, so do not get that idea. However, as of 11/11/2017 at 7:52pm EST, 9,897 people have been killed by guns year to date. This includes the Las Vegas and Sutherland Springs shootings, but also includes the 604 people who have lost their lives to gun violence in Chicago, which none of the anti-gunners mention, because it is an example of their failed gun legislation attempts. But I digress. In that same time period, 29,114 people have been killed by drunk drivers…Nearly three times the number of murders by gun. But are they considering banning vehicles or “common sense car laws”? Or, let’s talk about the #1 killer in this country. Abortion. 940,407 murders by abortion year to date. That is over 95 times the number of babies murdered than people by gun. When are they going to talk about common sense scalpel control?
There is more to it than this. They think their opinions are superior to opposing views, to the point where they feel justified in committing violent acts against those that hold a different opinon. So if they feel that they don’t want guns, nobody should have them, because they don’t feel comfortable. My personal opinion is that they have impulse control problems and project that onto everyone. But they feel it is perfectly okay to go out and kill their babies, and, well, you’d damned well better support that because that is their opinion, and you are not allowed to have a different one. Or, “You can’t ban cars, because I like my car. (until I don’t — And then you damned well better be willing to get rid of yours because you are destroying my earth, what the science says be damned!)” Or even worse, I am going to preach to you about how you are destroying the environment, and going to use my multi-million dollar jet to come and browbeat you in person about how bad of a person you are to dare to burn fossil fuels.
The fact that the anti-gunners try to label guns as “good” and “bad in Feinstein’s new “assault weapon” ban is simply ridiculous. Consider that the church shooter was using an AR-15, but so did the gentleman who took him down. So is the AR-15 good or bad? I think labeling the tool as good or bad is ridiculous. Akin to labeling phillips-head screwdrivers as evil, while flat-head screwdrivers are good. It’s almost like claiming that Home Depot rental pickup trucks are evil because it was used to kill 8 pedestrians in New York City. What it boils down to is that the tool is not intrinsically good or bad, it is the person wielding it. And in cases when seconds count, and the police are minutes away, it may be a good guy with a gun that saves your bacon.