2nd Amendment People — You Need To Finally Be Honest About Why You Want Unregistered Assault Weapons
By David Grace (www.DavidGraceAuthor.com)
The phony “gun control” arguments have irritated me into writing something on this topic.
Phony Argument Number One
The Second-Amendment people are now saying: “Existing background checks did not prevent [insert shooter’s name here] from getting the gun he used to kill all those people so, therefore, there is no point in closing gun background-check loopholes.”
“Background checks won’t catch every person who might become a mass shooter so there’s no point in every gun buyer having to pass a gun background check.”
This is equivalent to saying:
“Existing laws that require people to pass a test before they can get a driver’s licence did not prevent [Insert Name Here] from getting a driver’s license and then recklessly causing a terrible crash. Therefore, there is no point in making everyone pass a driving test and get a license before they can legally drive a car.”
So, is that a good argument for letting some people legally drive cars without taking a driver’s test and getting a driver’s license?
Related Phony Argument Number Two
“There are plenty of ways that a determined, would-be mass shooter can illegally get a gun so therefore there is no point in making everyone who wants to buy a gun pass a background check.”
“Criminals will always find a way to buy a gun illegally anyway so we may as well just let criminals and mentally-ill people buy guns and save all the inconvenience of those pesky background checks.”
This is equivalent to saying:
“There are laws against convicted drunk drivers keeping their driver’s license but alcoholics who want to drive will just drive without a license anyway so there is no point in taking the driver’s license away from a convicted drunk driver.”
Does that convince anyone that convicted drunk drivers should be allowed to keep their driver’s licenses?
The basic argument the 2nd Amendment people are making here is: “The law against [some crime] didn’t stop this particular person from committing that crime so therefore there is no point in having that law at all.”
Ridiculous.
These Aren’t The Real Reasons For Opposition To Background Checks
These silly arguments are just cover excuses for the real reasons the Second-Amendment People have for wanting to keep the gun show loophole in background checks and for wanting Americans to have easy access to unregistered military-style weapons.
The problem is that they’re not willing to admit those real reasons out loud.
This regulate/don’t regulate military-style weapons, register/don’t register firearms, dispute is really based in the clash between two totally different views of government that are held by the Gun-Control People and the Second-Amendment People.
The Gun-Control People’s View Of Government
The Gun-Control people believe in a democratically elected government, obedience to laws passed by that elected government, sworn, professional police forces, and the American Army and State National Guards being the institutions that protect the country and maintain order.
They see no benefit whatsoever and much harm from civilians owning military-style weapons and also see many detriments from anyone owning an unregistered firearm.
The Second-Amendment People’s View Of Government
The Second Amendment people hate and fear the government and believe that they need to prepare for the day when they will need to engage in an armed rebellion against the U.S. government in order to protect their notion of liberty.
They don’t want background checks because they want people to be able to buy guns without there being any record of the purchase. They don’t want anyone to have a list of who owns what guns out of fear that a “bad” U.S. government will use that list to disarm them before they can overthrow the “bad” Congress by the force of arms.
They want to have unregistered assault rifles that can be easily converted to fully automatic use so that when they feel that they need to rise up and violently overthrow the United States government that they will have the weapons to do so.
All their ridiculous arguments that background checks are unnecessary or pointless are just cover for this real reason: They want to have as many unregistered guns as possible so that they can be ready to mount an armed rebellion against the U.S. government if and when they decide that Congress has excessively restricted their freedom.
All their nonsense that AR-15s and AK-47s are wonderful hunting weapons and that they need 50-shot magazines so that they can be absolutely sure that the deer they wounded with their first seven or eight shots won’t wander off into the woods, bleeding and suffering, are, of course, total BS.
They make those silly arguments because they don’t want to tell people: “Hey, we want to be armed so that we can attack the police, the FBI, the ATF and the U.S. military when we decide that the politicians in Washington have taken away too much of our freedom.”
Sure, some of them think they will need these guns when the Black Helicopters sweep across the Mexican border and they will have to step in and save the country because the U.S. Army and the National Guard will both be proven insufficient to handle the threat. Or when the Russians invade in a real, live repeat of the plot of the movie, Red Dawn.
So, instead of admitting why they really want all these unregistered guns, we get the subterfuge:
“Background checks won’t catch every person who might become a mass shooter so there’s no point in closing the loopholes that allow people to buy unregistered weapons without any background check at all.”
“Criminals will always find a way to buy a gun illegally anyway so we may as well just let them buy guns and save all the inconvenience of those pesky background checks.”
“Semi-automatic rifles with 50-shot magazines are needed for humane deer-hunting by men who are really bad shots.”
“Simple bolt-action hunting rifles with six-shot magazines are insufficient to deal with those huge packs of wolves that so regularly attack weekend hunters.”
As far as I’m concerned, the National Rifle Association would be more accurately named the National Rebellion Association.
The More Fundamental Issue — Is Armed Rebellion Against The U.S. Government Ever Valid?
This “We need these weapons to be ready to overthrow a totalitarian American government” idea begs the deeper issue, namely, the belief that an armed rebellion against a Congress elected pursuant to the U.S. Constitution is ever valid.
Most people believe that if
- citizens are allowed to run for office,
- candidates are free to make their appeal to the electorate,
- citizens are afforded the reasonable opportunity to cast a secret ballot,
- their votes are fairly counted,
- the representatives so elected are allowed to operate the government in accordance with the Constitution,
that no one ever has a right to engage in an armed rebellion against the U.S. government no matter what law it passes that is upheld by the courts. Period.
Most people believe that no matter how unhappy you are with the laws that are enacted by Congress, you are still subject to them if upheld by the courts and you have absolutely no right whatsoever to use violence to resist the U.S. government in response to laws you don’t like. Period.
Essentially, most people believe that if each side has had its say and your side lost the election, too bad for you. You will have to suck it up and live with it unless the courts declare the law you don’t like to be unconstitutional.
The True-Believer Philosophy
But some people believe differently. They think that there are things they absolutely have the right to do or not do no matter what Congress or the Supreme Court says.
These people think that if the election or the court case goes their way, well and good, but if their side doesn’t win that they have the right to impose their beliefs on the rest of the country by the force of arms.
The Taliban would agree with them.
Prior to the civil war, Southerners believed that the federal government under Lincoln was going to pass laws making slavery illegal. They decided that they weren’t willing to abide by the electoral process contained in the Constitution, so in order to protect their “right” to own slaves they resorted to the force of arms.
True Believers always say: “We tried living within the system, but it didn’t work.” Meaning: “We were outvoted and we didn’t get our way even though we are right and everyone who disagrees with us is wrong.”
“So, now that the system has failed us [we didn’t get our way] we have to get what we know is right with guns.”
Remember the Weather Underground, the SLA, and other radical, left-wing groups of the sixties that felt they had a right to resort to violence against the government because they didn’t like what the government was doing?
This is why cults stockpile weapons. This is how terrorists think. This is why the Second-Amendment People want all those unregistered guns.
They want to be ready to militarily overthrow the U.S. government just in case they don’t like the laws Congress passes, OR to fight off an invasion of the Black Helicopters, whichever happens first.
Be Honest
So, Second-Amendment People, be honest. Stand up and tell the country that you want everybody to have access to unregistered, military-style assault weapons so that you can be ready to overthrow the U.S. government if, in your opinion, Congress oversteps its bounds and tries to take away too much of your freedom.
If that’s what you believe, then own up to it! Try to convince the rest of the country that you have a good case.
If you believe that everybody should have access to unregistered, military-style assault weapons in order to be ready to someday repel the threat of a foreign invasion that the Army, National Guard and State and local police will be unable to handle, but which citizens armed with these guns will, then say so.
If you think you are right then stand up and try to convince the rest of the country that the possibility that Congress will go nuts or the Black Helicopters will arrive is worth all the gun violence that goes with everyone having easy access to unregistered, military-style weapons.
If you think you’re right, then make your case honestly by telling people that these are the reasons you want everyone to have access to unregistered weapons.
Convince the voters that a totalitarian Congress or a Red Dawn attack are such real threats that they are worth the damage and death we have experienced and will experience from these unregistered weapons in the hands of criminals, would-be terrorists, and the mentally ill.
Have the courage of your convictions. Stop hiding the real reasons why you want people to be able to
- buy unregistered weapons
- buy weapons without a background check,
- buy military-style weapons that can be converted to fully automatic fire
- buy weapons with 50-shot magazines
- buy ghost guns.
If you think that protecting against the chance of a totalitarian Congress or a Russian invasion is worth all the violence and death from these guns then —
Be Honest & Say It Like It Is!
–David Grace (www.DavidGraceAuthor.com)
