Gun control necessary to dictatorship

Jeffrey Brown writes in the American Interest,

...The question then will be how far the Left is prepared to go to usher in the next fascist socialist utopia. They know how much easier this will all be if the guns are taken first.

Authoritarians have always understood that gun control is political control, which is why they don’t practice it against their own supporters. Gun control is for political enemies, and both precedes and hastens the eventual purge necessary to dictatorship. It really is that simple.

Read more here.

Infringement

Guest post
by Suzann Darnall

It seems to me that one more time, in various suggested ways, different levels of our government are planning on infringing (one more time) upon our freedom as Americans to exercise our Second Amendment right to bear arms. We already have too many laws and restrictions that merely hamper law-abiding citizens and do nothing to deter those who would do harm.

It is all being done in a wave of emotion following the mass shootings that have occurred recently. Particularly in response to those shootings which have taken place in schools. But, I am not sure it is being sufficiently thought through. Seems more like somewhat panicked emotional responses to what are undoubtedly horrible events. But, acting rashly seldom fixes a problem. Such acts usually have unintended consequences and merely exacerbate the problem.

One “plan” being floated here in Texas could possibly mean that legally licensed and armed citizens would have to live in fear of somehow being caught in a hidden aspect of the law if the convoluted “plan” was implemented. There are already laws covering carry, storage, age limits, weapons types, and licensing. In other words, pretty much anything and everything that is done illegally when a shooter goes into a school, church, or some other public venue. Criminals and those who would do harm do not follow the rules. They find ways to go around the rules and restrictions. More rules and restrictions only hurt the citizens who legally and lawfully own guns.

We simply do not need more laws. As I already stated, we have laws that cover pert near any and every aspect of owning, selling, buying, using, carrying, and storing a weapon. I cannot think of one aspect of life with a firearm that does not seem to have one or more laws attached. What we do need is a way to have these laws enforced. And, we also need those who are in favor of gun control to realize once and for all that CRIMINALS do not obey laws, so none of these laws will affect their behaviors!

If citizens are unable to easily carry and access their loaded weapons, what good are the guns for protection? Do celebrities, politicians, banks, and other guarded entities expect their armed security teams to keep all weapons unloaded whenever in the vicinity of groups including children under the age of 18? Or, do they expect no one to have guns except the military and police? Are politicians, celebrities, banks, jewelry stores, and other currently weapon guarded entities willing to take their chances being protected only by being able to phone 911, like the anti-gun crowd seems to think will work for all the rest of us?

I am sad to see even formerly Second Amendment supporting politicians allowing themselves to be led further off the path of Constitutional liberty. If they truly want to keep our children safe, stop making schools “Gun Free Zone” soft targets. Allow our children to be protected by armed good guys ... just like the banks, the jewelry stores, the celebrities, and the politicians.

What part of “shall not be infringed” do these gun-control advocates not get???

Follow Suzann at WoolyMammoth.Org

"The surest way to die on the wrong end of a gun is to leave all guns in government hands."

Bookworm writes,

When it comes to guns, the invariably unimaginative Leftists see only that guns kill people. They don’t see that guns save people (as happened with Willeford’s appearance on the scene of what could have been a much more terrible outcome). They don’t see that government is a terribly inefficient engine to protect us from guns.

Most of all, they don’t see (or refuse to see) that the surest way to die on the wrong end of a gun is to leave all guns in government hands. Those who could bear witness to this fact are dead — they’re dead in every land, ghetto, and concentration camp that the Nazis controlled; they’re dead in every land that the Soviets controlled; they’re dead in every place that the Maoists governed; and they’re dead in Cuba, North Korea, vast swathes of Africa and Latin America, and in every place in which Islamofascists gain control.

If I have to accept — as we all must — that there is no such thing as perfect safety, I’d rather put my faith in my fellow Americans than in my government. And yes, only Progressives could be stupid enough to demand government control over guns at the same time that they’re still vociferously claiming that our government is in the hands of a madman. That cognitive dissonance alone shows just how bad their arguments are.

Coming at him like a shark

AWR Hawkins reports at Breitbart,

High School senior Frank Harvey says his school called police and ordered him to have a psychological exam after discovering an homework essay against gun control that he had saved on a thumb drive.

Harvey wrote his essay against gun control in 2015, for a teacher at Manville High School in New Jersey.

According to New Jersey.com, Harvey left a thumb drive containing the anti-gun control project in a computer in the school library. He said “a Manville High School teacher instructed him to create a video arguing against gun control for a junior college readiness class last year” and that “video,,,provided examples of people who used guns to defend themselves from home invaders.”

The thumb drive was discovered and turned over to the school administration, which then called police. The police “cleared Harvey” of any wrong doing, yet “district officials suspended him and said he’d have to undergo a five-hour evaluation before being allowed back in school.” The administration said the teacher who would have assigned the project does not remember doing so.

Harvey’s mother chose to pull him from the school rather than have her son subjected to the psychological exam. She said he will simply pursue a GED to wrap things up.

News 12 contacted the school district for comment but they declined, citing “confidential student information.”