The Hypocrisy of Gun Control

The funny part about this whole discussion that’s happening is the dishonesty of the

argument. I love it when people say they’re anti-gun. Pro-gun vs anti-gun, right? Those are the two supposed camps. The pro-gun folks want the gun-grabbers to stay away, and the anti-gunners want guns banned by the government because they're big and scary. But are things really that simple? Is reality ever quite so dichotomous? I think this conversation could be viewed that way, but it's not really about pro-gun vs anti-gun and it never has been.

The real screw in this debate is this: there is no "anti-gun" faction. This is the hypocrisy of the anti-gun Left. The anti-gun people aren't really anti-gun. They're actually very pro-firearm; they just want the only people that possess weapons to be governmental in nature. The majority of them are sheep, cowardly and unwilling to accept the responsibility of the Freedoms they have no problem abusing from time to time, and the politicians pushing the agenda are in it for a disarmed populace that can't stand up to tyranny.

They'll do anything they have to, and say anything they have to, in order to stoke enough fear to try and get traction for their argument. The only thing they won't do is admit their agenda really has nothing to do with weapons. Anti-gun folks aren't saying that guns are bad, and the politicians on their side are in no hurry to give up their taxpayer-funded armed security details. They're saying that private citizens shouldn't have them, and that the ability to defend our rights against an out-of-control government is bad. The two camps are really more individualists versus Statists. The argument that's happening isn't truly about whether or not guns are bad. I'm sure that's exactly what it looks like on the surface presentation to most, and that's exactly how those in the media want it to look, but that's not what the actual fight is. The conversation surrounding firearms is yet another battlefield where the war of principles is being waged.

The "pro-gun" people are individualists. They're not willing to capitulate and surrender their liberties to a government that views an armed populace as the single largest remaining obstacle to absolute power; these people are headstrong and view their lives as their own responsibility. The "anti-gun" people are Statists. They're adamant about surrendering their rights and liberties to the government. They have no problem taking it on faith the same government won't immediately violate those rights, because hanging onto their rights puts the onus of responsibility for what happens in their lives on them. They don't want that so they're more than willing to surrender.

The people so adamant about surrendering their rights to the government don't

want that spade called a spade, though. They learned a long time ago that coming out too directly towards the object of their agenda is a dead-end because the People won't tolerate it. So they try to find all of these ways to justify the action, and stoke enough fear and doubt to manipulate people through emotion. They say that our 2nd Amendment is outdated. They say that the founders couldn't have known what technology would do even though the founders predicted exactly what would happen along the way. While history contradicts these arguments, it’s a perfect justification for allowing the government to break into and step on that right.

The talking points and list of excuses used to justify it are many. I've heard some winners, too. I've included some here because on the surface they even sound reasonable sometimes until even the slightest amount of scrutiny gets placed on the statement.

Gun Haters Favorite Excuses

1) "Guns kill people".

2) "The Founders couldn't imagine how dangerous guns would become".

3) "You don't need an AR to hunt".

4) "Guns are our biggest health concern as a country".

5) "Background checks should be required, because that could help."

6) "High Capacity magazines making killing people easier."

Do you see how this story goes? All of these are things I've heard lately, and some of them even sound reasonable. You might be able to find a seed of truth in some of the arguments floating around, but all of these talking points have one thing and one thing only in common—they are justifications for surrendering rights to the government, and that is why the Left is so desperate to win the argument. Their entire political existence, at this point, is predicated on the single idea of surrendering your rights to the collective will. Most of the time people that think like this will make massive leaps in logic, and it almost always ends with "let the government take care of you". And that kind of thinking is exactly what creates a Statist. They actually believe the propaganda that government is effective or can do anything it promises well even though every shooting Statists have politicized to attack the 2nd Amendment was caused by governmental failures to uphold current law. The only group worse than the people that believe the "government will help you" line, and this includes your politicians and some "educated" types, know full well the intention is to curtail individual rights and they're all for it.

The pro-firearm people, though, are painted as the enemy. We're all those big, bad NRA types. And the reason isn't because there's any actual danger. It's because we don’t care about government or it’s promises. We know it’s meant to fulfill a few jobs described in the Constitution and that’s it. This mentality stands in direct opposition to those who want to surrender their rights, and that's why they hate anyone that is pro-2A. This is the argument that should be the focus of this discussion; this makes everything simple. All of the distractions and red herring arguments fall away, and it becomes about principles. It becomes about preserving essential Liberty. It becomes about whether or not you’re ok with bowing to the political elite. It becomes about those who let fear make their decisions for them, and those that use their minds to wield logic in their decision-making process.

People MUST start viewing things this way. Because the fight isn’t over guns; firearms are just the battlefield we’re fighting on. This is about those who want the government to take care of them against those who want the government to piss off and do what it was designed to do. If we fail here, all our other rights are on the chopping block. Statists don’t care what the subject is, they just want the

government to control it so they don’t have to. That will, and already is, happening with the Freedom of Speech and all the others will be next. They will slowly work to cede every right that makes America special if we capitulate here. We must hold the line.

I know compromise sounds promising, but we are past this point. Compromise here is tantamount to defeat. There's more coming on this within the next few weeks because of current events spawning some other writing for me; stay tuned.