European Terror Bombs = US Gun Bans

Last week we saw another pair of terrorist attacks in Europe, these two at the Brussels airport and a subway station. The weapons of choice were bombs. Almost immediately anti-gun zealots put out a call for expanded gun control in the United States. The logic escapes me.

First off, let’s separate the two non-related issues. A terrorist attack using suicide bombs in Europe vs. United States gun control.

If you’ve seen any of the images from Brussels, you know the carnage of the attacks and the tragic loss of innocent life. Desperate people with no regard for human life willing to blow themselves up along with scores of innocent men, women and children for their ‘cause’ is nothing short of disgusting.

Already airports around the world immediately increased security in hopes of preventing similar attacks. The Belgium airport attacks were in the public, non-secure departure halls, before passengers are screened to go into the secure, gate areas. No attempts were made to go into the secure areas or on to the planes; the departure halls victims were the intended targets.

The debate is now on pushing the secure area of the airport out even further to the main entrances of the buildings or even to the entrances to the airports themselves. Of course, each time the security ring is pushed out further, it creates a human queue at that point, which then becomes the next soft target. Relying on barriers and safe vs. non-safe zones only relocates the threat to the next target. It does nothing to stop it.

As we’ve seen in these attacks and others around the world, lone wolf or small teams of individuals who are willing to martyr themselves in the name of a cause are extremely difficult to stop. It can be done and is being done, but the efforts are the most effective when their own community identifies the threats before they are in play. Once out in public, a suicide bomber can simply detonate themselves to kill and maim innocents if discovered at a security stop. Even if this is not their primary target, they still kill – and more likely than not, our first responders.

So, the connection between European terror bombings and US gun bans? It goes back to the Rahm’s Rule, the product of Chicago mayor and former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, which says, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

Of course there is no connection but the anti-gun proponents want you to believe you will be safer if you and everyone around you gives up your firearms. After all, once all the legally owned firearms are gone, nobody will be able to hurt you.

But wait… What about the criminals who get their guns by illegal means? What about the terrorists, a.k.a. thug criminals with a cause who can get guns by illegal means? What about the guns that come into the country illegally? What about the guns that are made here illegally? And what about the other illegal weapons, the ones that are actually the weapons of choice for terrorists, the bombs that can be made by anyone with common every day items from the local hardware or auto parts store?

Disarming innocent people – people who have done nothing, committed no crimes and never will – in the name of protection from terrorists only turns them into innocent victims of terrorists. These are honest men and women who only want to protect themselves and their families and are in the best position to do so.

Preventing attacks like we’ve witnessed in Brussels, Paris, Madrid, Istanbul, Ürümqi, Tokyo, Oklahoma City, Boston, San Bernardino… is possible, but it takes time and hard work. It’s not just intercepting emails and phone calls, or de-encrypting cell phones. It means identifying those with the intent to kill early and deigning them the ability to do so. It means solving deeper national and international problems and reestablishing a moral compass in all communities that says it’s not okay to commit mass murder over ideological differences. It means leading by example.

The answer is certainly NOT disarming a population of law-abiding citizens leaving them with fewer rights and protections than the terrorists who are trying to kill them.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #terrorism, #2ndamendment, #righttobeararms

 

If You Like Your Guns, You Can Keep Your Guns

This quote is of course a parody. Here is one of the President’s actual quotes from the International Association of Chief’s of Police conference on October 27, 2015.

“Every time a mass shooting happens, one of the saddest ironies is that suddenly the purchase of firearms and ammunition jumps up because folks are scared into thinking that Obama is going to use this as an excuse to take away our Second Amendment rights. Nobody is doing that.”

Over and over we’ve heard the President claim nobody wants to take away our firearms or our Second Amendment rights. Unfortunately, as we found out from his Affordable Care Act quote, this is not the case.

“If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”

Here is the reality of what’s going on. In municipalities, states and in Congress, new draconian restrictions on firearms and ammunition are being introduced at a blistering rate. All claiming to fully respect the Second Amendment, yet at the same time stripping law abiding citizen’s rights, and yes, their lawfully owned firearms away from them.

Much of this is no doubt related to the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the Friedman v. City of Highland Park from the 7th Circuit Court. Invigorated by the lack of high court’s willingness to rule on this case, outright bans as well as registrations schemes are popping up around the country.

A quick note on firearms registrations laws: The reason, the only reason for a firearms registration is to facilitate a government’s ability to confiscate them later on. Long term or short term, all registrations have eventually led to confiscations.

And that’s what we see going on. In areas where certain types of firearms – most often, but not exclusively, those deemed unsuitable for civilian ownership and labeled as “assault weapons” are not being banned outright, they must be registered. These registered “assault weapons” can never be sold or given to another individual in the state, not even to descendants through inheritance. Once the current owner dies, the firearm must be removed from the state or surrendered to law enforcement with no compensation. The full registry of “assault weapons” is eliminated with the current generation.

On one hand we have the President of the United States standing before the American public and swearing that nobody is trying to take your guns. On the other hand, we have members of his own party in the nation’s capitol and around the country pursuing laws on what the President has called his highest priority issue. It leads us to a disturbing dilemma. Either the President does not know what is going on or he is not telling us the truth.

Personally, I find this to be one of the saddest aspects of what is happening. Our nation’s leaders stand up and make up a narrative they want the country to believe with little to no accountability. Press events and so-called town hall meetings are tightly controlled and scripted to create and distribute the story. And while it would never be acceptable to interrupt and call BS on a sitting US President – we must respect the office, even if we do not respect the individual in the position at the time – we absolutely must call these things out. We must call it what it is, BS.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, 2016 will be the year to be heard. Be respectful, be polite, but absolutely be heard.

Bob

#oddstuffing ‪#‎2ndamendment‬, ‪#‎registration‬, ‪#‎confiscation‬, ‪#‎liesandtruth‬