Friday, May 13, 2016

Gun control legislation deliberately designed to facilitate murder

By Doug Book, editor

Advocates of overturning the right to keep and bear arms have spent years deliberately turning innocents into victims of slaughter, all for the purpose of eventually disarming the American people.

“Do as I say, not as I do,” gun-control zealots were predictably out in force after the Sandy Hook killings. After all, in the perverted mind of confiscation advocates like Michael Bloomberg and Barack Obama, the murder of 20 kindergarten students represented a longed-awaited opportunity to embarrass the more weak-kneed defenders of the 2nd Amendment into relenting to a nationwide assault against the foremost liberty of the American people. 

In fact, just 5 days after the killings, New York Mayor Bloomberg favored USA Today readers with a 6 point guide to “stop gun madness.” 

And like every previous claim by the hypocritical founder of Mayors Against (Illegal) Guns (Bloomberg enjoys the 24/7 protection of taxpayer funded, armed bodyguards as he denies gun ownership to fellow New Yorkers), the essay was a study in calculated misdirection. For Bloomberg and other proponents of “common sense gun legislation” know full well that their proposed ban on the sale of “assault rifles” and “high-capacity” magazines will have no effect on gun crime.  

Why craft legislation for the purpose of disarming only law abiding Americans? Why proudly advocate the existence of “gun free zones” which render innocents utterly defenseless against wanton killers?

Because if eventual plans for gun confiscation are to succeed, the left know it must make firearms a loathsome commodity to an increasingly pro-gun populace. What better way to accomplish this than to quietly “facilitate-by-statute” the most murderous fantasies of psychopaths intent upon making their names and deeds memorable events in American history?

Gun free zones, though represented as safe havens, have been deliberately fashioned to expedite the objective of leisurely slaughter as they provide only for the security and convenience of armed killers, not their statutorily disarmed victims.  What sort of diseased mind would deliberately legislate the slaughter of innocents in order to advance a political agenda?

At Sandy Hook, the fondest wishes of gun-confiscation advocates had come true. Knowing they would never have a better opportunity, Michael Bloomberg and other self-absorbed elitists pressed demands for firearm bans and restrictions as never before. After all, only unfeeling monsters could defend 2nd Amendment rights in the face of 20, brutally murdered children.

Yet the “assault weapons” ban demanded by gun confiscation advocates after the Newtown killings was rejected by the American people. According to the UK Telegraph, 23 mass killings took place in the 12 months after the Newtown murders, the most deadly in the Washington DC Navy Yard, another “Gun Free Zone.” But assault weapons bans remain unpopular and the American public continues to refuse their implementation.  

In a 2014 article, John Lott wrote that liberal newspaper editors were willing to publish the names of gun owners, but refused to have “My home is a gun free zone” signs placed in their yard.  As Lott explains “ One of the editors,  after saying he hated guns, worried out loud that such a sign would make his home a target of criminals.”  

The left is well aware of the dangers inherent in the manufacture of gun free zones. But if the deliberate sacrifice of innocents succeeds in bringing about the eventual confiscation of firearms, it's well worth the flow of blood. What’s the saying about breaking eggs to make an omelette?

No comments:

Post a Comment