Thursday, October 5, 2017

Guns, The Media, And The Left

     A Bill Buppert article at NC Renegade calling for a movement to repeal of the Second Amendment stirs the soup in a most provocative fashion. The heart of Buppert’s argument:

     Unlike the current divide-and-conquer strategies that the government leverages within the gun community such as pitting hunters and shot-gunners against black-rifle aficionados; instead of simmering in the pot as the incremental forces of the gun prohibitionists gain traction inch by inch. The Repeal would bring the entire agenda into crystal clarity and the fight and demarcation lines would no longer be subject to obfuscation, political gamesmanship and dissembling. The agenda would be stark and distilled to its essence:

     Will a country that strips its citizens of individual armament be as safe and trouble free as the civilian disarmament advocates claim? Can American exceptionalism make it the ahistorical example where liberty and freedom reigns in a country where every peer weapons capability is imbalanced toward a government monopoly on small arms in its police and military? Lastly, can the US government be trusted to do the right thing?

     Nothing will answer that question more clearly than a movement to repeal the Second Amendment.

     For context, Buppert is an anarchist absolutist who believes that the Constitution itself is an engine for the expansion of government. I disagree with his thesis, but it deserves the attention of any thoughtful advocate of freedom. But beyond that, it’s time for those of us who cherish our right to keep and bear arms to go on the attack – and to challenge the “gun controllers” on their true agenda and the incrementalism they’ve employed to pursue it.

     This morning, Kurt Schlichter has a few words to say on this subject:

     I, for one, am not super inclined to give up my ability to defend myself in response to demands by people who eagerly tell me they want me enslaved or dead. Literally dead.

     And this isn’t just about the ravings of a few unhinged loonies on social media (also, it ain’t “a few”). This verbal hyperbole is the leftist establishment’s MO. This is how they intend to strip us of our rights – via a constant campaign of hate that they hope somehow leads to us just giving them up. And it’s not just guns. Free speech? Oh, that’s racist, and it causes violence – by which they mean that leftists will attack you if you attempt to speak freely. Freely exercising your religion? Not if you violate leftist scripture – then you’re a bigot and your livelihood must be destroyed even though Sue and Shelly can wander two doors down and get someone else to decorate their nasty organic carrot wedding cake.

     And due process? Well, you must love rape if you think that a young man accused of it should be informed of the charges against him, allowed to cross-examine the witnesses, and have an impartial judge. Do you phallocentric male-identifying men and others have any idea how much harder it is to railroad some guy in the name of smashing the patriarchy when you actually have to prove your case with evidence? Like any woman would ever make up a rape allegation out of whole cloth! A fair trial? That’s something right out of The Handmaid’s Tale!

     And don’t get me started on the hate crime of hatred that is misgendering. Why, calling a man a “man” when xe got up this morning and decided xe was a non-binary, femme-leaning, twin-spirit otherkin is pretty much just what Hitler did.

     Schlichter strikes the jugular, as usual. The Left is inherently hostile to the very concept of individual rights. They recognize none of them; they never have and they never will. How could it be otherwise? The Left’s credo is Government Uber Alles. Their BLEEP!ing hero is Adolf Hitler. Why else would they invoke him so often? SJWs always project, remember?

     Once that is established beyond a reasonable doubt, the key question arises: Is it possible to argue with the Left about anything? If the answer isn’t clear to you, check your pulse: you may have died and not noticed.

     The anti-gunners are able to disguise their agenda only by changing the subject. “Guns kill people,” they scream. “That’s their purpose. So for people to have guns isn’t safe.” But if safety were the Left’s true priority, a whole lot of other stuff would take precedence on the ban-it list – and governments, which killed 170 million people over the course of the Twentieth Century alone, should be at the very top.

     It must be admitted that the Republican Party, in which so much hope for the defense of our rights has been invested, is of practically no value in this instance. There isn’t one gun rights absolutist anywhere in federal Washington. They’re damned few in the state governments, too. This is not a battle in which we can expect any politician to be our champion, or sincerely enlisted in our cause. Politicians are, ipso facto, worshippers of government power.

     The matter becomes clearest when supposed Republican defenders of gun rights appear in the media to argue for our case. The very first thing they do, without exception, is to say that “gun rights are not absolute.” That’s usually followed by a claim that “existing laws should be better enforced.” Betrayal from the first words out of their mouths! Of course, it doesn’t help that the media are utterly against private firearms and will do whatever they may to demonize them. With someone like that controlling the format, the exchange of points, and the ultimate presentation, the gun-rights advocate is fifty points behind before the debate has started.

     We must be our own best advocates. Moreover, we must go on the attack: to force the Left’s agenda, including the reasons for it, plainly into the open. A disarmed citizenry would be helpless before their vision of Leviathan – and there would be not one aspect of life, not even the smallest area of decision, that their Omnipotent, Omniscient, Omni-benevolent State would not arrogate to itself.

     Think it over.

No comments: