COMMENTARY – In 2011, in Pennsylvania, there were 470 gun-related murders. That is out of a total of 637 murders. Those are some pretty high numbers.
But here are some other pretty high numbers.
- Forcible rape (which is a distinction I will never understand because rape is rape, period) – 3,324
- Robbery – 16,131
- Aggravated Assault – 25,148
- Burglary – 57,850
- Larceny (Theft) – 208,435
- Vehicle Theft – 16,844
And one more statistic.
All of these crimes have one thing in common. The number of law abiding citizens that committed these illegal acts.
Now I am sure you are saying that there has to be at least a few innocent people who did these. Surely there’s some self defense involved somewhere. But I assure you, if they committed these acts, then they violated the law. I am not saying there could not be extenuating circumstances along the way somewhere. Its possible. But the fact, however, remains they did it.
So the problem with the President exploiting the people and tragedy of events such as the Sandy Hook Elementary school killings is that he is trying to emotionally manipulate the public to get an agenda out that is not about avoiding these tragedies. The problem is the flawed belief that many of these crimes committed by these non-law abiding citizens could be prevented with MORE legislation. The Sandy Hook incident, which he is holding up before the public like a huge crying towel was perpetrated by a person who did not own the guns. He stole them from his mother, whom he murdered first in this rampage. No law would have stopped this mentally ill individual from committing this atrocity.
I cannot say what the President’s agenda, nor what the agenda of Congress, actually is.
Some say they are really trying to do what is right. To which I would respond that it is commendable but flawed.
Others say it is more insidious and they are trying to disarm a population they feel threatened by. If this is true, I would respond, shame on you. Because if you were doing what is Constitutionally acceptable (that is, not taking rights from the people and the states, as Franklin and Madison argued you would not do in the Federalist Papers those several centuries ago), you would have nothing to fear from the people you would restrict Constitutional rights from.
But no matter the extreme, nor anywhere in the middle, reasons behind the laws our government is trying to double down on (there are already laws on the books that address all they are proposing), more laws will not prevent the tragedies they so heinously exploit.
All this gun control legislation is doing is taking away from the real conversations that need to be taking place.
Mental health. The economy. Public frustration. Over-burdensome laws. A government too far out of touch with the voters. Education reforms. The doubling down on freedom of religion errors and misconceptions. Not to mention avoiding international fears and concerns (at least publicly).
All of these things have taken a backseat to this emotional but ultimately imperfect battle among our elected officials.
As ratified by the states and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, one of the authors, the Second Amendment reads: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
And it has its foundation on English common-law, which specifically states that the people have natural rights in the area of arms for self defense, resistance to oppression (of which the colonist that framed these documents were so very personally aware of) and the duty to protect the state.
Do I think that the President and Congress want to usurp our rights in order to oppress us? I cannot say. But I can say that the forefathers who designed these rights did so with the foreknowledge that such oppressive governments can come into existence. Which is why they framed our Constitution the way that they did. James Madison argued for the creation of a central government, the Federal government, saying that it would derive its power from the states and the people, that it would never overstep these bounds. His reasoning behind this argument were that the states and the people would never allow it.
So weep for the victims of these degenerate acts, feel for the mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters. But we cannot allow the President or Congress or any other force that would exploit our pains and concerns and empathy in order to relieve us of our rights. As Madison points out, it is up to the states and the people to keep the power and influence of the federal government in check. It is incumbent upon each and every citizen to keep their focus on the things that will really help avoid these tragedies.
Had the person who committed the Sandy Hook murders gotten more adequate mental health, it would not have occurred. Had we as a nation not abandoned our educational system to the ideology that we answer to no higher authority than another flawed human being, this tragedy would not have occurred. Had we not become a nation of citizens who fear lawsuits for “getting involved”, this tragedy would not have happened. Had we not, as a whole, abandoned the poor and uneducated to the dregs of humanity, through drugs and crime and disillusionment, this and so many other tragedies would have been avoided.
Were we, as a nation, to address the concerns that really need addressing, such tragedies would be avoided. And of those gun related crimes would go down.
And those who would steal our rights from us – one small piece at a time – who offer up as proof grieving mothers and widows and children and tell us we need even more laws that will not be obeyed, would have nothing to use against our heart strings.
To our politicians, I offer up some advice. Enforce laws in existence. Fix the mental health system and attitude in this country. Stop using divisive politics to forward your own agenda and work less on your next election and more on solving the problems in America.