It’s tragic and sickening, but liberal ghouls have themselves some new coffins to shamelessly climb up on for gun-grabber pep rally purposes. Here are a couple of hefty buckets of cold-water reality to splash in their purpled, frenzied faces, not that it will do a damned bit of good.
A common myth you can expect to hear a lot in the coming days and weeks is that the United States “leads the world in mass shootings” and therefore we must pass some law that will do nothing to stop future mass shootings, but will infringe on the rights of law-abiding gun owners.
What you might not hear is that this claim is completely bogus.
Sure, if you following conservative media, you’re probably aware of this. Townhall, The Daily Signal, Bearing Arms, FEE, The Washington Examiner, and others have all previously reported on how the myth that the United States leads the world in mass shootings is based on a deeply flawed study, which has been debunked by the Crime Prevention Research Center.
Yet, the myth remains alive and is sure to be regurgitated endlessly again.
Yep, count on it. Even Barry “Obama” Soetero interrupted his recent public-spotlight vanishing act—probably taking time out to sweat the slow exposure of his many crimes related to the sudden unexpected collapse of the Mueller witch-hunt—to weigh in with an unwelcome dollop of his habitual moronic duplicity featuring the bogus claim. They’ll squawk about this and they’ll squawk about that, in most careful and diligent avoidance of examing the REAL root causes.
It’s quite tiresome, really. In truth, the main underlying cause of increased mass-murder events — and so much evil in general — is a severe philosophical/spiritual malaise besetting our nation.
Were gun control the remedy here, mass shootings would be rare. Not only were there fewer firearm laws many decades ago, but in 1940s and ‘50s New York City, boys would often take guns on the subway because they had rifle clubs at school. So is access to firearms really the problem’s root cause?
As for the El Paso shooter’s motivation — our immigrationism combined withleft-wing environmental concerns — there are people who will do evil in a cause’s name regardless of its nobility or ignobility. The real question here is, boiled down: Why are we seeing so much more evil in America now than in bygone days?
Say what you will about TV, the Internet, video games, violence, or mass murder, it can’t be right or wrong if there is no right or wrong. It’s the ultimate self-evident reality: How can you build a moral society when its shades-of-gray people don’t even believe in morality?
Not that I’m trying to argue with the basic assertion he’s making, but I remain convinced that a far more important aspect of any serious root-causes examination would have to be the way shitlib culture has treated America’s young men: by viciously attacking them; shaming them; denouncing them as “rapists,” every last one of them. Ordinary, healthy young men are to be regarded as sexist, misogyist, thuggish primitives, guilty of being fundamentally incapable of reining in their violent and antisocial impulses until proven otherwise. They are denied any healthy outlet for the natural masculine urge for competition, for earning their rightful place in a clearly-defined hierarchy built around physical achievement and ability. The term “toxic masculinity” itself ought rightfully to be banished as a hate-crime, if we’re going to have to put up with such folderol as the asinine notion of “hate crime” at all.
Our young men are being beaten down, harrassed, and horribly scarred by a ruthless campaign to emasculate them—to remake them in compliance with a truly toxic Progressivist design for their “improvement.” After decades of such abuse, how could any of us be surprised when the more fragile among those poor, wrongly-scourged souls finally do break and lash out against a world that so cruelly tormented them?
Over to Larry Correia’s timeless 2012 masterpiece for the bottom line:
Well, I suppose if your need to do something overrides all reason and logic, then by all means let’s ban guns.
Australia had a mass shooting and instituted a massive gun ban and confiscation (a program which would not work here, which I’ll get to, but let’s run with it anyway.). As was pointed out to me on Facebook, they haven’t had any mass shootings since. However, they fail to realize that they didn’t really have any mass shootings before either. You need to keep in mind that mass shooting are horrific headline grabbing statistical anomalies. You are far more likely to get your head caved in by a local thug while he’s trying to steal your wallet, and that probably won’t even make the evening news.
And violent crime is up in Australia. A cursory Google search will show articles about the increase in violent crime and theft, but then other articles pooh-pooing these stats as being insignificant and totally not related to the guns.
So then we’ve got England, where they reacted swiftly after a mass shooting, banned and confiscated guns, and their violent crime has since skyrocketed. Their stats are far worse than Australia, and they are now one of the more dangerous countries to live in the EU. Once again, cursory Google search will show articles with the stats, and other articles saying that those rises like totally have nothing to do with regular folks no longer being able to defend themselves… Sensing a trend yet?
And then we’ve got South Africa, which instituted some really hard core gun bans and some extremely strict controls, and their crime is now so high that it is basically either no longer tracked or simply not countable. But obviously, the totally unbiased news says that has absolutely nothing to do with people no longer being able to legally defend themselves.
Then you’ve got countries like Norway, with extremely strict gun control. Their gun control laws are simply incomprehensible to half of Americans. Not only that, they are an ethnically and socially homogenous, tiny population, well off country, without our gang violence or drug problems. Their gun control laws are draconian by our standards. They make Chicago look like Boise. Surely that level of gun control will stop school shootings! Except of course for 2011 when a maniac killed 77 and injured 242 people, a body count which is absurdly high compared to anything which has happened America.
Because once again, repeat it with me, criminals simply do not give a crap.
In conclusion, basically it doesn’t really matter what something you pick when some politician or pundit starts screaming we’ve got to do something, because in reality, most of them already know a lot of what I listed above. The ones who are walking around with their security details of well-armed men in their well-guarded government buildings really don’t care about actually stopping mass shooters or bad guys, they care about giving themselves more power and increasing their control.
If a bad guy used a gun with a big magazine, ban magazines. If instead he used more guns, ban owning multiple guns. If he used a more powerful gun with less shots, ban powerful guns. If he used hollowpoints, ban hollowpoints. (which I didn’t get into, but once again, there’s a reason everybody who might have to shoot somebody uses them). If he ignored some Gun Free Zone, make more places Gun Free Zones. If he killed a bunch of innocents, make sure you disarm the innocents even harder for next time. Just in case, let’s ban other guns that weren’t even involved in any crimes, just because they’re too big, too small, too ugly, too cute, too long, too short, too fat, too thin, (and if you think I’m joking I can point out a law or proposed law for each of those) but most of all ban anything which makes some politician irrationally afraid, which luckily, is pretty much everything.
They will never be happy. In countries where they have already banned guns, now they are banning knives and putting cameras on every street. They talk about compromise, but it is never a compromise. It is never, wow, you offer a quick, easy, inexpensive, viable solution to ending mass shootings in schools, let’s try that. It is always, what can we take from you this time, or what will enable us to grow some federal apparatus?
Then regular criminals will go on still not caring, the next mass shooter will watch the last mass shooter be the most famous person in the world on TV, the media will keep on vilifying the people who actually do the most to defend the innocent, the ignorant will call people like me names and tell us we must like dead babies, and nothing actually changes to protect our kids.
Larry includes absolute reams of statistical, historic, and factual backup for his argument here; if you haven’t seen this one before, do NOT fail to read every word of it now. There are many fine points to be made in support of the individual right to self-defense with legally-available tools best suited and adequate to the task; Larry makes most of ’em in this piece, and makes ’em quite well too.
None of which will change a single damned thing, as I said, nor move this now-pointless and intractable shouting match forward so much as an inch.
The Leftist position on guns can be filed under one of two overall categories: well-meaning, or ill-intentioned. For the well-meaning, their view is founded entirely on ignorance, emotion, irrationality, and assumptions that are in error. Some small few of these people are in fact amenable to persuasion by our side, to whatever degree. Most aren’t. They have been thoroughly propagandized, their indoctrination facilitated by a total lack of any experience with or exposure to guns, along with the terror inspired by that ignorance. They don’t think beyond the immediate feel-good rush from new legislation, restrictions, or even bans and confiscation; assuming as they do that all problems can be legislated away, the practical impossibility of actually implementing their “imagine no guns!” fantasy never occurs to them. Their hearts break at the suffering of the victims and their loved ones; they’ve never had any use for guns in their own lives, and can’t even begin to imagine a good reason why anyone else would either. They’re afraid of guns, so you should be too. Anyone who actually likes the evil things might as well be an alien from another planet. In a sense, they are.
The ill-intentioned, on the other hand, may or may not be ignorant of the facts…which doesn’t matter even slightly, because they don’t care. Their opposition to private ownership of firearms and the 2A springs not from a desire for a safer, more civilized world, nor from compassion or empathy for the victims. It comes from an unslakable thirst for ever-greater power and control, just as Larry says above. For them, neither truth nor logic enters into it in any way, and are really either irrelevancies or impediments. Their interest is not in protecting, shielding, or safeguarding anybody, and the only thing they want to put an end to is the ability to resist or defy them.
So what are we left with, then, as we watch every last law-abiding American gun owner slandered in the press yet again—as Enemedia despicably uses hysterical, terrified kids as props in pursuit of their tyrannical agenda? The arguments have all been made. There is little if any productive discussion to be had here, not a whole lot left to talk about. It’s all rapidly boiling down to the one thing, and either they will or they won’t.
So: come and take them, Leftards.
Full stop, end of story update! LawDog spells it out:
And — again, gods and little green apples — my inbox comes up with emails starting with: “It’s time for …” or “Common sense …” or “You have to agree …”
Let me stop y’all right there.
The answer is “No.”
No, I’m not going to give up my guns.
I don’t care. I’m not giving up my guns.
I didn’t murder anyone. My guns didn’t murder anyone. My friends haven’t murdered anyone. My friends guns haven’t murdered anyone.
80 million American gun owners didn’t murder anyone.
I am not going to be punished for some pustulent little bridge-troll deciding to vomit his evil into a Wal-Mart in El Paso.
And, yes, taking my guns away is punishing me. I will not be punished for the evil of someone else; evil that I had NOTHING TO DO WITH.
This is not up for debate. We’ve tried debate at the national level and the only thing debate got us was incremental chunks of our gun rights taken away by you faithless dacoits.
I am no longer going to engage in a debate in which I lose every time. Sod that for a game of soldiers.
So, let me stop you right there, Scooter. The answer is “No.”
Cut, print, that’s a wrap, people.