“Common sense” gun control: Be ready to defend the kids in kind against killers and government abuse

Well, the media mouthpieces for more government control over the minds of future voters and serfs for the fiefdoms of statist rulers, they have come out again using the shoot-em-up in Nashville to preempt the obvious fact getting highlighted by some again that the shooting is a good reason to home-school.

The New Yorker points at statistics that seem to indicate children are more at risk from so-called “gun violence” at home than in schools. No wonder President Harry Truman called such numbers, “lies, damned lies, and statistics”. The truth is, historically, government policies and actions have killed many more people, including children. Speaking of which, how many children were killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki by Truman’s own orders to drop the atomic bomb on them?

Secretary of State in Bill Clinton’s cabinet said in an interview that the 150,000 children who had dies in Iraq as a direct result of the Clinton-regime’s actions against the Iraq government “was worth it”. How many children died in Stalin’s Holodomor genocide against Ukrainians?

What about the US government? Does anybody dare say that the citizens in the city-state democracies in ancient Greece were safe from tyranny committed by their own future rulers? Or the era of republics in Rome were safe from their own senators or generals?

Can’t happen here? What about the American Indian children in the town massacred by General Custer and his troops, resulting in the massacre of Custer and his troops afterward? What about the Japanese children held in a war camp by the FDR regime so revered today by defenders of the current regime that wants to ban guns outright, but must do it by steps and by lies, damned lies, and statistics.

For example, I would take a real bet right now, that in a truly double-blind study, you would find that all, or at least almost all, shootings of children in their home would be in households that do NOT home-school.

Liars. Be very skeptical of regime organs that advocate more power for the rulers that obviously don’t care for children in Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, and of course the children in schools that do not have armed protection like there was in the school in Washington, D. C. where Obama had his children, when he said he was glad they did have five armed security guards.

Advertisement

Democracies and republics

Talk about word games! Hahaha! The people that worked on the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution made a BIG distinction between “democracy” and “republic”. Quoting 20th century politicians who conflate the terms with a new definition of “democracy” does not help the discussion. Witness the ridiculous names for totalitarian states like the Democratic Republic of North Korea!!

Lincoln’s definition is itself just word play. Abraham Lincoln had a federal officer return an escaped slave in Illinois to his “owner” in Missouri. He suspended habeus corpus illegally. He hounded one opposition congressman in a northern state who had to flee to Canada for his life. He had his troops shoot live fire into a crowd in New York that was protesting the military draft. Before the war started, he proposed making slavery permanent in the Constitution as a way to keep the Union, thereby proving once and for all that the whole Civil War was fought to protect tyranny by the central government. He had planned on shipping blacks all back to Africa, because the poor things could not compete fairly with whites, so he said.

Forget ex post facto laws. The tyrant went after opponents who violated no laws.

In truth I trust neither republics nor democracies nor monarchies nor any other form of “government” to be fair or to fulfill their defenders’ justifications. Checks and balances obviously have not worked at all in the US or elsewhere. The only fair society promotting peace and prosperity is one where its members practice the non-aggression principle. The outliers, like thieves and invaders, who violate this, in such a society, would be suppressed by the principle of self-defense. Before you say that’s impractical, look at what you already have in every place ruled in history and in the present by any kind of government. They all start their existence based on theft, without which they cannot exist: Pay “taxes” or meet forceful punishment.