To kick off Obama’s last year in office, he signed several unconstitutional executive orders on gun control. Knowing they were very unpopular, he tried to justify his actions in a town hall meeting. His arguments were not only weak, they revealed how out of touch and dangerous this Progressive Liberal viewpoint is.
A mother and rape victim expressed her concern that Obama’s actions would hinder her parental responsibility to keep her family safe. Obama confessed, “There are always questions as to whether or not having a firearm in the home protects you from that kind of violence.” He continued, “what is also true is there’s always the possibility that that firearm in a home leads to a tragic accident,” and “you have to be pretty well trained in order to fire a weapon against somebody who is assaulting you and catches you by surprise”.
These remarks insinuate Obama believes law-abiding citizens are too stupid and incompetent to handle and secure a gun, and are more dangerous with a gun than a criminal.
It’s not that the gun has to be used for it to be valuable, it’s the fact that the gun and other tools are there, period. That’s why the first viable handgun was called the Colt PEACEMAKER. Just the known presence of a firearm is a major deterrent.
Why do so many massacres happen in gun-free zones? It’s because they know no one there has a gun or any other means of protection. The gun is the means of keeping the peace, not an automatic result of violence.
If I think someone is in our house, one pump of my shotgun will make them think twice about what they are doing. I likely won’t even have to fire before they’re heading out the door. Why do Liberals want to deny America citizens that protection?
Obama arrogantly plays the same gun control propaganda card Liberals have been using for years. He pleaded, “maybe we could try to stop one act of evil, one act of violence”. But in the efforts to stop that “one act of evil”, how many other’s do we allow because people weren’t able to protect themselves? How many women will we accept being raped? How many senior citizens will we tolerate being assaulted? How many families will we endure being victimized? How many defenseless people will we stand by and allow to be murdered?
Maybe we could try to stop one act of evil by arming a few well-trained teachers and administrators. Maybe we could try to stop one act of violence by allowing military personnel to carry on base. Maybe, to protect the children, we could keep it affordable for single mothers to obtain a firearm to protect her kids.
If Obama was honestly concerned about gun control and preventing just one violent act, then why won’t he call radical Islamic terrorism for what it is? Why are all Muslim attacks reduced to workplace violence or an isolated incident? We are forbidden to even mention their Islamic faith. Even in the latest massacre by a Muslim, Democrats had to spin attention away from Islamic extremists’ hatred of homosexuals and find some way to blame Christians for it.
Liberals fall over themselves running to the microphone to accuse the gun for the massacre, calling for the prosecution of the NRA. In contrast to Omar Mateen’s treatment, Dylann Roof proved all white people are racist, brought condemnation and blame on the Confederate flag, and exemplified white privilege. How many people need to die before Progressives can finally admit Islamic extremists are at war with us on our own soil? Why has the FBI released Mateen’s 9-1-1 call with his admission to ISIS allegiance being censored?
In response to another question, Obama commented, “the laws of supply and demand mean that if something’s harder to get and it’s a little more expensive to get, then fewer people get them.” This contradicts his response to the rape victim of, “there really is nothing we’re proposing that prevents you or makes it harder for you to purchase a firearm if you need one.”
Thinking he’s supporting his statements of only hindering criminals, Obama actually exposes a crucial lie to the rape victim and confirms the suspicion he is going after lawful gun owners. His supposed attempt to handicap criminals will actually restrain law-abiding citizens more. Those on fixed or low incomes and living in rougher neighborhoods may not be able to afford a firearm. They are now left more vulnerable and defenseless than ever to acts of evil and violence.
Criminals, on the other hand, will not really be affected. Police officers will tell you that when they find a gun on a suspect, it is most likely a stolen one. So it doesn’t matter how many background checks are required, criminals will get guns through crime. In January, a Muslim attacked a Philadelphia police officer in the name of Allah. The shooter’s gun had been stolen from the police department.
Shortly after that incident, a Brown County, Ohio, officer was assaulted. He was found unconscious by fellow officers with face and head wounds and his gun was missing. Now another criminal has a gun. No background check or increase in price would have prevented that. In fact, Obama’s actions will only intensify attacks like this on police.
All gun control does is restrain law-abiding citizens. It will do NOTHING against “violent criminals”.
We cannot sit quietly on the sidelines anymore. We need to be teaching our children the truth about guns and their role in freedom. We need to be having conversations with our neighbors who believe Conservatism, not Islamic extremism, motivated Mateen. We need to be getting involved in our local communities and educating ourselves and others about true tyranny and true freedom because this fight is just getting started.
But that’s just my 2 cents.