It’s a shame that in their rush to “do something”– anything – Democrats have made this critical debate a partisan show. Last week, my Democrat colleagues rushed to pass two partisan pieces of legislation that would have done nothing to stop some of the most prominent mass shootings in recent memory. H.R. 8 would not have stopped Newtown. H.R. 8 would not have stopped Parkland. It would not have stopped Las Vegas, or Sutherland Springs, or San Bernardino or many other tragedies. But the proponents of gun control don’t want you to judge them based on outcomes; they want you to judge them based on intentions.
Richard Hudson
United States Representative for North Carolina
March 2, 2019
H.R. 8 won’t stop school shootings
[I thank Representative Hudson for standing up for our rights and pointing out the deliberate deception of many anti-gun people.
While I agree that what Hudson says in that last sentence is true for many people and it’s a relatively safe thing to say to avoid a lot of controversy it’s not entirely true.
I believe that some gun control proponents, particularly, but not exclusively the politicians, know the proposed gun legislation cannot make people safer and that is their intention. They want something that will fail to make people safer and, in fact prefer, that it will make people less safe. This gives the politician more power because it makes people more dependent upon government.
That said, the common person doesn’t realize they have been duped and believe the implied intention. I said “implied” because it is very rare that politician will come out and explicitly state that a law making access to guns more difficult will make people safer. They will say, “Its just common sense.” They will say, “No one should have these guns.” They will say, “80% of the people want background checks.” But they don’t say, “Criminologist predict this will reduce violent crime by 20%.” Or, “This will cut mass shootings deaths in half.” That they don’t make the claim that gun regulations will improve public safety strongly implies to me that they know it will not improve public safety.
I can give someone a temporary pass on not knowing something and making an overstated claim about their unproven hypothesis being true. But when they almost for certain know the truth and deliberately word things to deceive people that is an extremely strong indicator they are evil people. That these people deliberately deceive others to infringe a specific enumerated right make them criminals punishable by law.
I hope they enjoy their trials (http://bit.ly/EnjoyYourTrial2).—Joe
Yup; anyone who claims to care so deeply about “saving lives” will have, because of such deep caring, taken the time to learn the basics. Thus, knowing the basics, they would not advocate for gun restrictions.
It’s as simple as this; If you care, you know better.
If you’re advocating gun restrictions, you don’t care about saving lives.
I will not give anyone a pass on that, for caring means educating one’s self. Caring means discovering the truth no matter where it leads, and it means changing your mind easily and thankfully, without resistance, when truth is found.
What we’re seeing instead is a cult, with all the implications of the term in full force. A death cult.
Yet there is more to it, and much more. One may “care about saving lives” and yet still see humanity as something to direct and control, much the way that a herdsman cares about the well-being of his flock. But people are not sheep, nor cattle. If someone follows you because you care about him it is his choice and his alone to do so. You are free to care for them and they are just as free to tell you to fuck off (and you must fuck else you’re a criminal). And so there is a fundamental pathology in the soul which makes someone view humanity as cattle to be herded, fed and groomed according to the herdsman’s preferred regimen, dehorned, and etc. as though free choice is nothing and coercion is everything. And it is nowhere near compassion. Quite the opposite.
No; this attitude toward humanity as cattle flies in the face of the very concept of liberty, and must be rejected therefore out of hand, entirely and completely, such that any time it rears its ugly, deceptive, proud, arrogant, murderous head it is exposed for the larcenist, psychopathic serial killer, rapist, cannibal and slave-dealer that it is.
Aaand if the truth be known the papacy is just such a beast (to a tee)(but who listens to that kind of shit anymore, amiright?)
“But the proponents of gun control don’t want you to judge them based on outcomes; they want you to judge them based on intentions.”
Once again…..WRONG! The proponents DO NOT want to be judged based
on their intentions. Because their true intent is to DISARM us so they can RULE us. What they want is for us to buy their bullshit about being concerned for our
“safety”…..about which they have been proven repeatedly to be a LYING about.
The very last thing the gun grabbers wish to do is to openly admit the truth about WHY they are doing what they do.
As admirable as Rep. Hudson’s remarks may be in opposition to the gun-grabbers, even he makes the same category error as his (and our) opponents.
Not a single one of those mass shootings was a TRAGEDY. Yes the results were TRAGIC, but each and every one was an ATROCITY.
Using the word TRAGEDY to describe the events removes the element of human agency involved. Earthquakes causing death and destruction are tragedies. Similarly, tornadoes, land slides, floods, and wild fires are tragedies.
Mass shootings involve human agency and are ATROCITIES. Even though the results are TRAGIC, we need to remember (and remind everyone) that the actions of the perpetrators were ATROCIOUS.