A political leader has just warned you about a grave danger in your community. Let’s say a serial arsonist is preying on homes. Would you ever expect that leader to, instead of making it easier to fight arson, work towards confiscating your fire extinguishers and making it harder or even illegal to buy sprinkler systems? That would be nuts, right?
And, what if some guy across town drove his SUV into a crowd, killing and injuring dozens? Would you expect that leader to want to confiscate your car or prevent you from buying one? Because that leader somehow believes that restricting your ability to have a car will somehow stop a criminal from committing a crime with a car? Again, that’s crazy.
No person truly dedicated to American liberty would do these senseless things. But I answered my question, didn’t I? They’re not dedicated to American liberty.
MORE NEWS: Justice Thomas At The Top Of His Game
That’s why, after a mentally ill young man with racist ideations shot and killed 10 people in a grocery store in Buffalo, N.Y., Joe Biden and the Democrats told you they want to prevent people who had zero to do with this crime from having guns?
Disarming harmless peaceful American gun owners, whom you say are at risk from armed criminals, is immoral. How can you have a constitutional right to Life (as in… Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness), if you don’t have a right to self-defense to protect your life?
And why did Biden choose not to visit Boulder, Colorado after a nearly identical attack, or go to Waukesha, Wisconsin when another mentally ill young man with racist ideations killed and injured dozens, mowing them down with his SUV?
Because those murder suspects (and victims) didn’t conform to the Democrat narrative:
In Buffalo, suspect white supremacist, victims black, including a cop: Go there.
In Boulder, suspect Muslim, victims white, including a cop: Don’t go there.
In Waukesha, suspect black supremacist, victims white: Don’t go there.
There is no other explanation.
Bill O’Reilly wrote in his new book, Killing the Killers, about terrorists, similar to Waukesha, who used an SUV to drive into and kill and maim some 54 people on Westminster Bridge in London near the British Parliament. He wrote:
MORE NEWS: Only House Pro-life Democrat Pretty Lonely
The terrorist is using a technique known as “vehicle ramming.” That lethal action has become popular around the world for the ease and simplicity with which it can be executed. There is little chance of detection beforehand by law enforcement, no bomb or gun being required. This leads authorities to dub vehicle ramming as the “poor man’s weapon of mass destruction.”
Again, why don’t leftist politicians attempt to confiscate cars from or make them harder to possess for law-abiding people like they do when a criminal uses a firearm? Because leftist politicians drive cars. There’s no difference in the idiocy of the concept. The only difference is in the politicians’ warped, ideological justification.
And, back to what I alluded to up top. Even looking at it from Biden’s warped anti-gun perspective, why would Joe Biden warn people he believes are potential victims, about the existential dangers of “violent white supremacists,” and then say he wants to disarm them? How does that protect them?
Once more, why do leftists attack people’s guns but not their cars? Because leftists own and drive cars, but they don’t own and shoot guns (or, at least, don’t admit to it). In fact, what most anti-gun nuts know about firearms could fit in a Quark (look it up)-sized thimble.
A law-abiding gun owner is as likely to shoot you in the head with a gun as a carpenter is to hit you in the head with his hammer. Or as a law-abiding driver is likely to run you over with his car. But the anti-gunners have been successful in convincing too many Americans that firearms are imbued with agency. That they can act on their own. That they’re responsible for crimes rather than those wielding them illegally.
Since when is it wise to disarm people under attack? It’s weird because the Biden administration obviously believes strongly in arming potential victims of armed aggression—just not Americans. After all, he and Congress just allocated $40 billion more to help arm Ukraine against Russian invaders. They believe it so much they’re even using money America does not have.
Now, arming good guys and disarming bad guys is a good thing. But since when does passing laws or issuing executive orders that only infringe on the good guys’ rights to keep and bear arms and does nothing to disarm criminals, a good thing?
With any other similar life-threatening danger, the left doesn’t want to take away your ability to protect yourself. You’re sick, you get medicine. You’re hungry, you buy food. You need protection from the elements, you buy or rent a house or apartment. If you want to keep your home from burning down you get an alarm system and keep fire extinguishers. If you want to keep your business from arson, you install a sprinkler system.
Then why should we allow our government to, when we’re threatened by criminals, whether the illusory white supremacists or tangible BLM, Antifa, and other real criminals, to deprive us of the necessary means for our self-defense. Remember, there is no right to self-defense without the right to the most efficient means of that self-defense—a gun.
If you ever wondered why it was so brilliant—and necessary—to place the right to keep and bear arms (right to self-defense) number two among our most important individual rights, you can stop wondering. Just look at how rabidly anti-gun leftists want to eradicate one of our most important natural rights.
To emphasize the point, they’re not just opposing Americans possessing a “thing,” a gun. They are literally trying to prevent your God-given right to self-defense. To stop some thug from taking your life or that of your loved ones or other innocents.
Now, back to my above comment about Biden arming Ukrainians, but opposing arming Americans. In the NRA’s publication America’s 1st Freedom, Susanne Edwards, a war correspondent reporting from Ukraine, points out some interesting realities Ukrainians are learning about Americans’ “Second Amendment” rights while fighting the Russians.
The ordinary people, and their governments at all levels, are learning the importance of an armed citizenry. One man emphasized some common concerns people might not think about when their military and police are diverted to protect a nation’s or city’s borders.
One man Edwards spoke with named Luda, mentioned some realizations he had. He said he wasn’t a soldier but realized how important his “gun is now because the police are busy with other things, and we can’t call them if something goes wrong.” He continued. “And just because we have war doesn’t mean that all the looters, thieves, and other criminals have left.”
And if you don’t think it could happen in the U.S, even in a limited fashion, it already has. Just look at the BLM/Antifa riots. People had no hope of calling 911 and expecting a quick police response if any at all. The police were “diverted.” This alone is ample justification for gun rights.
In fact, the lack of police protection during the riots is mentioned by many Americans as the reason for the unprecedented spike in U.S. gun sales. They feel insecure since the leftist criminal justice officials and politicians have abandoned their responsibility for public safety. Luda said some of Ukraine’s gun laws and restrictions are less infringing than in the U.S.
Luda also said people “have proudly stated that they are much more American than European in this way [preferring limited firearms restrictions]. That’s great, but wouldn’t it be sad if we allowed the anti-gun rights Democrats to turn what has been known as the American Way into the Ukrainian Way?