No law can limit the methods available for a motivated person to do violence unto others sufficiently enough to justify the infringement of natural civil rights through prohibition, even if democratically agreed upon. The people lose and nobody gains anything except an illusion of safety. That illusion will break every single time it is tested with even the most remote bit of competence.
Keith Finch
November 2, 2019
A Constitutional Case for… Gun Control?
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
We need this guy as president. Hell, make him dictator for a year or two.
People who regards facts over emotion.. This needs to be the litmus test of politics from now on. If America is to survive. Indeed, what ever happened to “shall not be infringed”.
I just read the whole piece. Awesome. Thanks Joe!
This is mistaken. Gun control is not meant reduce crime or prevent it. It is to disarm the citizenry so they are powerless. Crime and safety is just the public face.
That is part of the reason why arguing with die hard gun control proponents, the far left and a majority of democrats is useless. Logic, reason, facts and reality when bringing up how gun control doesn’t work to reduce crime is lost on these people because crime has nothing to do with why they push gun control. They push gun control so they can forcibly disarm you and them use the force of the state to control you and punish or preferably kill you if you resist.
In a nutshell the sole reason for gun control is because they want you disarmed because they want to kill you. They only care about power and do not care about human life or suffering in any capacity unless it can be used to get them more power. That’s why I feel that they would have no problem exterminating 100 to 150 million people. They view humans that oppose there ideology as a infestation in need of extermination. They want everyone that opposes them and not like them dead and the do not care about how high the bodycount is or the means it took to get that bodycount.
The only thing that may be able to shake them out of it is if they’re horrified enough to stop and realize how wrong they are. When children are murdered by the government because there parents own guns. But since most on the left hate everyone not like them and view humanity itself a parasite on the planet in need of extermination even that may not be enough. I would go so far to say those on the far left hate us so much if the government became totally tyrannical and starting rounding up the children of gun owners to be sent to camps to be exterminated they would look at it as a good thing. They would CELEBRATE! The hate of Nazi era antisemitism has nothing on the modern far left progressive. The only thing stopping them is they don’t have the power to do it and they would want someone else to do it.
It’s often helpful in fighting the other side’s propaganda to pretend to take their claims seriously. If you can counter their pretend-arguments to show they are false, you’re ahead of the game. It means you get to convince people who started out believing the lies. Or to put it differently, you don’t have prove they were lies. That’s often fairly hard because people who aren’t in the middle of all this are likely to assume both sides are playing fair, and it’s a matter of looking at which argument is the better one.