There is an old maxim that people who don’t study history are doomed to repeat it. Sadly, that seems to be true, and like the word “doomed” implies, it’s the bad parts of history that keep getting repeated.
Possibly the worst part of this truth, though, is that there are people who genuinely fight for policies without having any idea of the historical outcomes when their policies have been tried before (and they’ve always been tried before). So, those people may sincerely mean well, but they are also sincerely wrong. Everyone, though, has to pay the price when those who are sincerely wrong get their way.
And we’re seeing that again, now. Ben Strang (for MSN!) writes,
Rates of injury and death caused by firearms [in New Zealand] are tracking higher than ever before.
Data released by police under the Official Information Act shows 10 murder or manslaughter deaths in 2022, up until 31 July. There were 11 in total in 2021.
Injuries are also running at a record rate, on track to exceed 300 firearm-related injuries for the first time. In 2021, there were 298 gun-related injuries recorded by police, the highest ever.
To put that into perspective, Cam Edwards writes,
It’s been three years since New Zealand’s sweeping ban on semi-automatic firearms took effect, with a six-month long “buyback” that resulted in about 56,000 guns being turned over to police in a compensated confiscation scheme that officials promised would make the country a much safer place. That’s plenty of time for the ban to have had an impact on the country’s crime rates, but so far there’s not much evidence that the disarmament effort has made a difference.
Why is this happening? Because criminals don’t follow laws (that’s what makes them criminals, remember?), so, criminals don’t follow gun control laws, either.
It’s not hard to understand, and anyone who has bothered to read a real history book (instead of revisionist politically-driven history books) would know that this is exactly what would have happened. Why? Because this is what always happens when weapons are confiscated: society becomes even more dangerous.
The lack of basic understanding of human nature and history from gun control advocates and politicians is appalling, but it’s not a surprise. They wouldn’t have that position if they had that understanding.
More bad things happen than good things happen when legislatures are involved …
It’s been said that Americans forget to soon and its happening now …
If society is honest and historically accurate, the only question that has any relevance to the gun control debate is, ”Do you trust those in government, now and forever in the future, to not take your life, liberty, or property through the force of government?”
If the answer to that question is “no,” the gun control debate is over.”
– KrisAnne Hall. JD
If you’ve never heard of “Hegalian Logic,” you need to look it up, and UNDERSTAND how the left is using it against the people, the Constitution, and this country… EVERY DAY.. IN EVERY ASPECT of of our lives!
THEN….
Apply Hegalian Logic to the “gun control debate.”
The Second Amendment states CLEARLY…
“The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!”
Yet, since the first “gun control law in the country (written after the [Civil War] to prevent freed slaves from owning guns), we have gone from “shall not be infringed,” to OVER 26,000 laws on the books, because of “common sense,” and “keeping people safe.”
The debate in Washington (yes, among liberals, but conservatives are almost as bad) has gone from “shall not be infringed” to “it depends on what you mean by infringement,” or “it only means the militia,” or “if we can save even one life.”
It’s why I STILL believe the “Heller Decision” was both a “win” AND A LOSS FOR GUN RIGHTS!
In that decision the majority stated that “dangerous or unusual weapons could be regulated.”
Could someone show me where it mentions “dangerous or unusual weapons” in the part of the Second Amendment that states “The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”?!
Who decides what constitutes “dangerous or unusual weapons?!” If the government has the “power” to DEFINE what they are *AND* the “power” to REGULATE them, they can just keep expanding the definition of what THEY want to define as “dangerous or unusual!”
The Founding Fathers apparently didn’t see anything wrong with the people having FREAKING CANNONS!
And now, they have millions of people standing in line, BEGGING the government to take away their right of self protection, and make them virtual slaves!
Liberal Logic:
°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°
“Only the government and the police should have guns!”
BUT…
“The government is corrupt and the police are Racists who shoot unarmed people!”
The dumbing down of the people… Along with Hegalian Logic… Has brought us to this point.
EXCELLENT argument!!
Once again showing that the anti-gun, defund-the-police pushers are using the “rules for thee but not for me” hypocrisy to disarm and subjugate the masses into relying on the ‘government’ to ‘protect the people’ when it’s the GOVERNMENT the citizens need protection from! All while living in their MANSIONS behind their HIGH FENCES and their ARMED BODYGUARDS at the public’s expense (material or OTHERWISE). (Please pardon my misuse of literacy: run-on sentence, misplaced preposition, incomplete sentence. TY)
Those who demand “gun control” ignore the obvious. Guns will not disappear just because they’re difficult to legally acquire.
If ya want more “gun safety”, TEACH gun safety in schools. This can be easily accommodated by eliminating unnecessary gender and racial bias classes.
Comments are closed.