770-500-F-I-R-E (3473) | info@ssusa.co

770-500-F-I-R-E (3473) | info@ssusa.co

School Shootings & Gun Control Laws

We’re a gun store and shooting range, so it doesn’t (shouldn’t) take a rocket surgeon to figure out where we stand on 2nd Amendment issues and gun control laws. However, due to another rash of recent killings by psychopathic murderers, I felt compelled to clarify exactly where we stand, why we take such a stand, and the solutions we propose. First and foremost, we stand fully and firmly with the 2nd Amendment in the United States Constitution’s Bill of Rights. Second, evil exists, and it is up to us law abiding citizens to stand up to evil and eliminate it, especially when the local or national government is incapable of doing so or refuses to do so. We have seen examples of both such cases recently. Thirdly, who should we protect: politicians or children?

2nd Amendment

Before I get into the most recent pubic mass murders, I want to explain what I believe is the meaning of the 2nd Amendment text. There are lots of people who argue legalities over certain words in the text. I’m not here to do that. I’m not a constitutional attorney. Here’s what I believe it means.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State

The authors of the text had, just a few years prior, endured a years-long war to free a group of colonies from an overbearing Monarchy. They had created a “free state”, and wished to keep it free. Therefore, they knew that they had to have warfighters at the ready. Who fought that war? Regular citizens did! People like me and you with whatever weapons they had, bought, stole, took from a dead enemy soldier, or made for themselves. Citizens formed the militia, freely and voluntarily, without pay or employment or guarantee. There was no standing army.

Regulated” is a word that – today – we almost purely associate with government, as in “government regulation.”  But we must remember that, when this document was written (1791), the government of this nation was just a few years old, and was not in the business of regulating anything! Therefore, government regulation is not what that means. In this context, I believe “regulated” means trained, prepared, ready, available, with processes – however crude – in place to stand it up and stand it down. It means “a well functioning militia”.

the right of the people

First, “the right”. That ‘right’ is not being created here. It’s being articulated: “the right” is assumed to already exist, with or without a government of any sort. The right to self defense comes from God, not any public authority. One does not need permission to defend oneself.

Next, “of the people” is what, to me, makes the full case against the argument that only the military should have weapons. No. The people is specifically used in this text to mean exactly that: the people, as in “We The People”, every citizen.

to keep and bear arms

In 2008, Heller codified our right to keep arms, meaning that every citizen has the right to own a gun within his or her household. It is Bruen, on which SCOTUS is about to issue its ruling, that should codify our right to bear arms, meaning carry them in public. It still amazes me that these cases had to even get to SCOTUS, but when I take a step back at how the founders envisioned our legal system working, it was meant to be slow and careful, hard to change. Since it’s taken well over 200 years for these challenges to the 2nd Amendment to be fought out, that’s actually about right.

 shall not be infringed

This is the big one. The entirety of the US Constitution serves to limit government. Not once does the document limit the rights of the people. Not once. The purpose of the Constitution is to limit government, again, because the authors had just defeated and escaped from a totalitarian government in King George. This text is no different in context, but is actually broader than any other stipulation in the constitution because it doesn’t even specifically call out the government alone. Even the first amendment forbids Congress from making any law against free speech, etc. Indeed, “shall not be infringed” applies – I believe – to any entity that would create any impediment to a US Citizen’s right to keep and bear arms.

The next major 2A case to be argued may be that of a private property owner refusing to allow an individual to carry a firearm on private property. That’ll be a doozy! “Shall not be infringed” will be even more thoroughly tested.

Here’s an article that goes a little deeper into the most common anti-2A arguments, and explains them better than I can.

Politicians

Now, why did I go through all that on 2A? Two reasons. First, because that’s directly where about half of the country goes every time there’s a school shooting. They blame guns. Guns are the problem. People shouldn’t own guns. Or people shouldn’t own certain types of guns. Ban assault weapons. You know the drill.

To every argument that comes immediately after one of these horrible tragedies, I blame the murdering psychopath, and then refer to the US Constitution. We are a Constitutional Republic. We elect representatives to govern our states and nation based on the Constitution. The 2nd Amendment is a ratified part of the Constitution. Period.

That leads to the second reason I focused so much on the 2nd Amendment. Politicians know nothing about guns, and yet at every tragedy proliferated by a murdering psychopath, they try to make new laws to prevent law abiding, non-murdering, non-psychopathic citizens from buying and owning firearms.

Allow me to present just a few examples of our elected officials speaking about guns. Their words equate to me trying to speak about astrophysics after I’ve had a lot to drink. It makes no sense at all.

  • Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) – “I’ve held an AR-15 in my hand…it is as heavy as 10 boxes that you might be moving, and the bullets that is utilized, these 50 caliber bullets, need to be licensed and do not need to be on the streets.” This is the same Congressional Representative who spends our tax dollars on her own private security…with guns.
  • Vice President Joe Biden – While he was VP, Biden did a town hall Q&A with Parents Magazine. In that meeting, Biden demonstrated his complete ignorance of firearm use. Biden recommended that you “buy a shotgun and fire two shots out of your front door if you feel threatened.” Yup, just blast out your front door, assuming that’s not where the murdering psychopath entered your home.
  • Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) – In an interview discussing a bill to ban so-called “assault weapons”, the Congresswoman attempted to explain what a barrel shroud is, since barrel shrouds were on the list of items that the “assault weapons” legislation would ban. Here’s what she said: “I actually don’t know what a barrel shroud is…I think it’s the shoulder thing that goes up.” Shouldn’t they know what they are regulating?
  • Congresswoman Diana DeGette (D-CO) – “What’s the efficacy of banning these magazine clips? I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those know they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these ‘high capacity’ magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.” You simply cannot make up such a level of ignorance.
  • New York Assemblywoman Patricia Eddington (D-District 3) – “Some of these bullets have an incendiary device on the tip of it which is a heat seeking device. You don’t shoot deer with these bullets or you could cook it at the same time.” You don’t have to make it up, because politicians provide all the material any comedian would ever need.
  • California State Senator Kevin de León – “This is a ghost gun. This right here has the ability with a 30-caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second. 30 magazine clip within half a second.” You get the point.
  • President Joe Biden – Just this last week, as he recalled his visit to a New York trauma hospital, Biden said doctors showed him X-rays of gunshot wounds. “They said a .22-caliber bullet will lodge in the lung, and we can probably get it out — may be able to get it and save the life. A 9mm bullet blows the lung out of the body,” Biden said. “So, the idea of these high-caliber weapons is, uh, there’s simply no rational basis for it in terms of self-protection, hunting,” Biden added. “Remember, the Constitution was never absolute.” If the Constitution is not absolute, we have lost the Republic, and Biden has broken his oath to uphold and defend it.

These statements are just the tip of the iceberg. However, they all clearly demonstrate that our elected officials are almost completely ignorant of that which they seek to regulate. In most any situation, when someone is called upon to speak about a subject with some authority (and knowing millions of people will be watching), one would take the time to educate oneself in that particular subject. I suppose our politicians feel no such obligation. So they speak so foolishly, and yet expect us to take them seriously. We cannot and should not.

Uvalde

Evil exists. Pretending otherwise is a mental disorder. A psychopath taking guns into an elementary school and murdering innocent children is pure evil. That murdering psychopath is dead, and I am glad he is dead. I honor and respect the hero who took control of the situation and took out the killer. In the meantime, 21 families are in mourning.

A dear friend of mine is in Uvalde to visit, comfort, and pray with these families; however, he is spending most of his time chasing away the media from the victims’ homes and funerals. He calls them vultures. And how quick our ignorant politicians are to take up “gun control measures” in Congress and state houses in their effort to prevent such a thing from ever happening again.

It won’t work. It never has. But government doesn’t function based on the logic that says “when we did this before, it was not effective, so let’s try something else.” Instead, half of them blame the guns that this murdering psychopath used, instead of blaming the murdering psychopath himself.

Solutions

The reason my friend is spending so much time chasing away the media is that the media only reports what the media wants you to see. What the media will never show, report, or otherwise acknowledge is that murdering psychopaths never, ever go to a hardened, protected, armed-to-the-teeth location to carry out their evil. Instead, they approach the nearest soft target with a “Gun Free Zone” sign placed nicely out front. That’s their welcome mat.

To answer the specific question of how do we prevent school shootings like this most recent killing spree in Uvalde? Harden the schools! Protect the children! President Biden is on record, via his Press Secretary, that hardening schools “is not something he believes in.” I still cannot believe that’s the official policy of the White House. There is much, much more than we can do to prevent such atrocities, but protecting the children should be the very first thing we should do! Shore up the defenses, and then go after the enemy.

There are many people today who refuse to acknowledge the existence of evil. Evil does exist. How many murdering psychopaths do we have to witness to believe that evil exists? Laws do not prevent crime. Laws articulate specific crimes and set forth punishments for those who commit such crimes. Only a visible armed presence will deter a murdering psychopath.

And when I say the word “harden”, please know that I do not mean, “Just give ‘em all guns!” Believe me, after watching some of this garbage, I will be the first to say that there are MANY teachers and school administrators who should never, ever be allowed to handle a firearm.

“Hardened” means trained and prepared, much like an army. Much like, in fact, the army that protects our politicians. Many are Secret Service, but most are private security. Very well trained, experienced, and willing to take you out – with a firearm – if you threaten their principal.

Gun Control Laws

Our Congress will “do something”. It will not be “better than nothing”, because as usual they are looking only at politically expedient options. Here are three of the most seriously considered “options” that our Congress is looking at for “gun control”. They are not look at “murdering psychopath control” at all.

  • National Red Flag Laws – These laws give you and me and our neighbors, friends, and enemies the ability to notify local or federal authorities that another person is not mentally fit to own or have access to firearms. Sounds good, right? Most propaganda does. Now imagine your ex-spouse calling local police and telling them you are not fit to own guns. Just because they can. Without any due process, the police can now confiscate your guns. All of them. It’s “guilty until proven innocent”, and you have to use your own resources to prove your innocence.
  • Broader Universal Background Checks – The FBI is in charge of all background checks today. If the FBI had done its job, Parkland never would have happened. They knew about the murdering psychopath in Uvalde as well, but he still passed the background check. “Broader Universal Background Checks” is a euphemism for “Give the FBI more access to more records so they can do their job just as poorly as they have been doing it.” We can’t sell a gun here without the 4473 and a NICS background check today, meaning background checks are already being done, and it doesn’t work to stop criminals from breaking laws.
  • 1000% tax on AR15 rifles – Not kidding. I don’t think this one will make it, but it shows you the lengths that anti-gun politicians (who have their own personal armed security) are willing to go in order to snuff out the 2nd Amendment.

Choices

Who should we protect first: our politicians or our children? The answer is our children, because they cannot protect themselves, nd politicians have armed security guards alread. Everyone else, every other law-abiding citizen has the right and the ability to arm up, train up, and stand up to murdering psychopaths. May God spare us all from being put in such a situation. If He allows it, may we be swift and accurate.

I know I could not get elected to dog catcher on such a platform, because nobody wants to hear it. But anyone who says our society is moving in a direction of safety is not dealing in reality. We are steadily getting more and more dangerous as a society. We cannot assume that murdering psychopaths will just stop being murdering psychopaths, especially when we’re too afraid as a society to actually call them that, lest we offend them.

I know some of you will disagree with me generally and specifically here. I invite your comments, either here on this page or to me directly. You can email me at kevin at ssusa.co. I read and reply to every email, and I look forward to the conversations.

An armed society is a polite society.” –  Robert A. Heinlein

4 thoughts on “School Shootings & Gun Control Laws”

  1. Best discussion I have seen in a long time about a very important topic.

    As Sargent Friday said, “Just the facts”

    Reply
  2. The idea of “hardening” our schools is the only way we can prevent these horrid acts of evil in the future. My wife is a teacher and she’ll be the first to say that most school teachers / staff are not capable or willing to properly train and handle a firearm. However, we don’t need MOST, we only need a few in each school.

    You can’t walk 5 feet into any government building without being screened or at least confronted by security. Aren’t our schools much more important than our government? As a parent, I’d testify to this. Harden our school! NOW

    Reply

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Subscribe and Get A Free Range Pass

preloader