Sorry, But There’s No Polite or Peaceful Way To Advocate For Gun Control

by Tommy Grant

Next Post Coming Soon…▶

I recently came across an interesting post on social media. An actress with a bunch of followers tells the story of how people were mean to her daughter online, someone who had been wounded in a mass shooting.

Before we get into why she’s being unreasonable here, let’s first explore a little bit of background. It’s true that her daughter suffered during and after a 2019 mass shooting, and that’s no laughing matter. She had a long recovery after being shot in the stomach, and her best friend was killed next to her.

But, these days, she isn’t just telling people about how the shooting stole part of her childhood.

One very commendable thing she’s done is get involved in “stop the bleed” classes. That’s a real way to save lives from violence, one that can have a positive effect in the world. She’s also advocated for people to be more careful how they handle guns, especially not allowing children and criminals to get access to them. Once again (assuming government isn’t forcing the issue), most gun owners can agree with that.

But she’s also out there stumping for gun control. Even a cursory look at her Instagram page or Twitter accounts shows that she’s not just a safety activist. She’s demanding all of the usual gun control rabid anti-gun people want. While living in California, the anti-gun Nirvana, no infringement on the right to keep and bear arms is too much for her to get behind.

So, what her mom’s tweet really means is, “My daughter is a victim of a mass shooting and advocates for gun control. Why are people being so mean?”

Her mom, like many other gun control proponents, has no earthly idea why their advocacy is offensive to so many people. They think they’re part of a peaceful movement that can only make the world a better place. When people respond with hostility, they think it further justifies their position, because anybody who would be rude to good people such as themselves has be insane, right?

What they’re not getting is that there really is no polite or kind way to advocate for limiting other people’s right. That includes their gun rights. Why? Because taking people’s guns away isn’t peaceful. Sure, if the government banned all guns tomorrow, many people would peacefully turn them in, but that doesn’t mean they’d do it because they wanted to. The people who would comply would only do out of fear of the government sending men with guns to kill them.

And the people who don’t comply? We’d be protected by the Fourth Amendment for a while, but if evidence emerges in any way that we still had guns, the government would send men with guns to take them away by force. Anything short of surrendering and going to prison would result in being shot and killed by those men with guns that people like Tretta want to sent after us.

The other thing to consider is the effect this would have on marginalized groups in society. “Liberals” like the Trettas think that they stand up for our rights, but their political party only takes half-assed measures to protect us (when they do anything at all). So, at present, firearms are very much necessary to protect people of color, the LGBT+ community, and religious minorities from violent bigots. If guns were banned, those violent bigots wouldn’t give up their guns, but you can bet that in many places those bans would be aggressively enforced against marginalized groups.

And then there’s the fact that Americans use guns to defend themselves about 1.6 million times each year. Those are robberies, rapes, assaults, and murders that are prevented.

The end result is that rather than protecting people, gun control laws only leave the most vulnerable and disfavored people in society defenseless against the most heartless and savage.

The same is true for mainstream populations. There are left-wing nutcases who would go shoot up a church or a religious school, and those nutcases aren’t going to give up their guns. But you can bet that in some states, strict gun control laws would be used to disarm church security members unless they go through the expense and hassle to pay for police or professional security officers.

So, once again, good people would end up getting hurt and killed as a result of people who thought they were protecting society from violence.

The Trettas and people like them need to keep in mind that they brought on the ugliness and hostility by advocating for confiscation, imprisonment and/or actual violent death for people who want nothing more than to peacefully exercise their Second Amendment rights. There’s absolutely no way to politely promote that, and no one owes them courtesy or kindness when they do it.

Next Post Coming Soon…▶



Read the full article here

Related Posts