It has been three weeks since the devastating loss of 17 lives to a potentially-deranged fellow student. The student, Nikolas Cruz, used an AR-15 to execute his dark plan. Within no time, a national movement has sprung up with renewed calls for gun control or increased regulatory requirements for gun purchases. Being led by survivors of the mass shooting, the movement attempts to hold politicians, gun owners and gun manufactures to task for acts committed by an individual.
What is wrong with this picture?
The first thing that stands out to me in this situation is the speed in which this movement arose. It took Black Lives Matter a year before it gained national prominence. This “teen” movement became a fully-fledged national movement within days. It would almost appear as if gun control advocates were lying in wait for a tragedy that would justify them launching a national campaign against gun owners.
There seems to be an interesting juxtaposition here. It suggest that this movement is agenda laced in particular ways.
Please observe the following:
1. 650 lives were lost in Chicago last year and there was no national movement for gun regulation.
2. Despite the loss of countless young lives in war-torn countries bombed by America, there was no interest in the loss of life via American military engagements. (The current outcry is supposedly based on concern for the safety of the young.)
3. Most gun crimes are committed by handguns, but this movement seems fixated on mass shootings and AR-15s.
4. Young people are 10 times more likely of dying through bike-related bike accidents than mass shootings.
5. The odds of dying from a mass shooting is less than 0.002%, according to the National Safety Council.
Despite the above-mentioned evidence, the media and gun control advocates seem hellbent on regulating gun ownership and demonizing anyone associated with firearms, with calls for businesses to disassociate themselves from pro-gun organizations.
Keep in mind that gun owners are not criminals, but there is this presumption of guilt that is coming from the gun control crowd.
There is also an implicit racial bias that encompasses all of this. It appears that gun violence is not a pressing concern in America until it affects young Caucasian kids. In town hall meetings the teen survivors seemed to speak with moral authority when criticizing pro-gun advocates. Where were these gun control advocates when countless black families were burying their children last year?
The chances of dying an alcohol-related death is 1:123. An estimated 88,000 people die from alcohol-related causes each year. This makes alcohol the third most preventable cause of death. According to the 2015 NSDUH (National Survey on Drug Use and Health), it is estimated that 1.3 million people aged 12-20 engaged in heavy alcohol use in the past month. Research indicates that alcohol use during teenage years could interfere with normal adolescent brain development and increased risk of developing AUD (alcohol use disorder). In addition, underage drinking contributes to a range of acute consequences including injuries, sexual assaults, and even death.
There is a 0.002% chance that someone will die in a mass shooting.
Nevertheless, there is a claim that guns are what endangers our youth. Statistically speaking, 99.99% of Americans will never die a gun-related death. They have a higher chance of dying from heart disease. There is no gun problem in America.
The founders of America just concluded fighting a tyrannical government. In order to accomplish this feat, they created a loose confederation of states bound together by the Articles of Confederation. Once the fledgling colonies succeeded in defeating Britain, they wanted to create a national government to protect themselves from foreign invaders. The colonies were concerned that a strong national government would become the nightmare that they just defeated – like the tyrannical British Empire was.
In order to settle this matter, the Bill of Rights was drafted in order to protect what the founders considered inalienable rights. Among these rights is the 2nd Amendment, which is hotly debated these days.
The meaning of the 2nd Amendment is absolutely clear: The founders were not concerned with their citizens being able to hunt – what they were concerned about was that the national government they had created could dissolve into an oppressive institution.
Have we forgotten the words of the Declaration of Independence? The people must always been in a position to defend themselves against their own government. This is the full and complete intention of the 2nd Amendment. For this reason, there is no compromise or concession that can be made regarding our rights. The right for the people to protect themselves is inherent to them, and was not created by government. Government need only recognize this right. It is for this reason that the purity of the 2nd Amendment cannot be blemished by hysteria and fear.
The greatest terror to any free people is government which has been responsible for more deaths than any single entity in existence. If history is any indication, the expansion of federal power and the decrease of arms in public hands will create the perfect environment for tyranny. It would be foolish to trust our security completely to a government that already spies on us, lies to us, imprisons us, enslaves us, sends us to meaningless wars and pushes policies that places limits on our freedom. A government like this would be an absolute monster were it not for the fear of rebellion by an armed populace.
Gary St. Fleur
Latest posts by Gary St. Fleur (see all)
- Don’t Let Gun Control Hysteria Strip Us of Our Rights - March 16, 2018
- Do Robots Have Rights? - May 16, 2017
- North Korea and its Violation of the NAP - May 11, 2017