Pages

Friday, March 29, 2013

Constitution: The Protector of Gun Fearing Cowards

Well, let's take a break from the craziness of homosexual marriage, and the so-called equality debate, to look at something far less polarizing.  How about politicians?  More specifically, how about politicians who shift blame from themselves and onto the people they supposedly represent?

Now it should be noted, before I go any further, that the stance I took in my last article (Equality: Homosexuals, Marriage, and Christian Blindness) holds true for me, and should for any Christian.  At the end of the day, I am more concerned with the state of lost souls than I am gun control measures or politics in general.  With that said, it is also important to note that Christians should still know what is going on in politics, because the decisions made at local, state and federal levels will in most cases ultimately affect them.

With this being said, the gun control debate is still going strong in the United States, no matter how eclipsed it may be by the marriage equality issue.  Ultimately, restrictions on the ability to own firearms of one's choosing will affect Christians; but it will affect them first as citizens of this country, and only secondly as followers of Christ.  However, the move to push actual bans on certain firearms will have major impact on Christians in the long run, because it does remove an element of control from the citizens and places that control in the hands of an obese and scarcely functioning federal government.

Note this interview from CNN:


Even people who are favoring gun control recognize the fact that the government of these United States is not capable of moving as quickly as it should.  In this instance, it is my opinion that the slow, waddling gait of the lumbering Fed was a blessing in disguise; it prevented certain elements within the government from capitalizing on the shock, horror and generally knee-jerk reaction of the American public.

However, the debate continues, and it is being head up by some of the most unbelievably dense and/or ignorant individuals, political and otherwise, that this nation has ever witnessed.

People such as Dianne Feinstein, who contradicts herself regularly on the issue; even when testifying before Congress.  Such as Jim Carrey, a man who I still enjoy; yet who has demonstrated that he has no idea what is at the heart of the issue.  Such as Chris Murphy, who regularly shows his lack of gun knowledge by insisting that a ban on magazines is the answer; this despite the fact that the Virginia Tech shootings took place even with the gunman changing clips.  And finally, people such as Jackie Speier.


Ms. Speier went above and beyond her compatriots in passing the buck, by stating that the entire system of government has been set up to "protect the cowards in this country."  She not only effectively blamed the Constitution that gives her the job she has, but added insult by stating via inference that anyone disagreeing with her is a coward.
You don't have to take my word for it:



Now, I have a few questions that came out of watching this clip.  The first is what is California doing to their water or air that is causing so many of their people to become imbeciles?  (Those of you who know me know how generous a statement that is.)
The second question I have is probably going to be the most offensive thing I've said so far, so steel yourselves: Who does she think she is, to call others who oppose her and her school of thought cowards, when she is the one who has been rabidly and psychotically against firearms since she was shot?  Who's the coward, Ms. Speier?  You are a disgrace to your state, your office, and your country for comments like that, and it is my spite for your politics that prevents me from referring to you as "Representative" or "Congresswoman."
You are right on this point, though: The Constitution does protect the cowards in this country.  You're living, flinching, yellow proof of that fact.

Aside from her, we've got the vice-doof making statements as blatantly false as any, and who has stated that a so-called "Assault Weapons Ban" is just the beginning.  It's amazing that opponents of gun rights will readily admit that they've never fired a weapon (hello, Piers Morgan, you limey bastard); or will admit that they don't live anywhere near the places that violent crime is actually an issue (anyone know of a federal gun ban supporting rep who lives in Chicago?)

We've also got the F*Tard-In-Chief pushing gun control measures through via Executive Orders.  (For those of you who don't know where this term comes from, please refer to the Executive Order denying the prosecution of known "recruiters" of child soldiers and simultaneously providing weapons to the very countries enslaving and brainwashing children.)  When all is said and done, Do these people actually represent us?  How can they, if they do not realize how low of a priority gun control is right now?
From the National Journal:
While the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School stirred up plenty of passion for gun control and closed part of the enthusiasm gap, [Lanae Erickson Hatalsky, the director of social policy and politics for Third Way] argues that the economy or the unemployment rate may be more important to these people. A Pew Research Poll from January confirms this, showing gun control near the bottom of voter-issue priorities.


Is it any wonder, then, that states are beginning to be flooded with gun control nullification legislation?  The people of the United States are more concerned with controlling their federal government than they are controlling the sale, ownership, styling and usage of guns!

But really, Pat Henry of "Girls Just Wanna Have Guns" had it one hundred percent correct on this point:
...what if the elaborate procedure to amend the Constitution was carried out, and enough states voted to ratify the repeal, would that be the end of your right to keep and bear arms?
No, it would not, because the Constitution does not give you rights, it merely instructs the government not to interfere with the God-given rights you already have. 


The thing that most gun ban pushing, right limiting, yellow cowards tend to forget is this:  You cannot have it both ways. Either the Constitution is a living document, as they claim, and applies now to modern firearms- Just as it applies now to text messages, chat boards, blogs, etc. -Or it is not.  If it is not, then it still allows for the ownership of modern firearms.
These feckless blips on the historical radar want it to say only what they want it to say; they want a McDonald's style government with a twist: "Have it our way."  However, the Constitution expressly forbids such a ruling style.  That has not kept the Capitol Hill Nutters from attempting to change things, however, and we all need to be better informed and more aware of what is going on around us.  Why?

Because these people aren't out to stop violence, as they say.  They don't want to put an end to bloodshed.  They want to put an end to the very real threat that if they one day go too far, the first bullet of a new American Revolution will hit them.