Friday, November 25, 2022

Disarming the People

 <<< These shootings, among many others, have put the US on an ominous track of making 2022 the second-highest year for mass shootings on record, according to data from the Gun Violence Archive, a non-profit that began tracking the instances in 2014.>>>

<<<“The idea (that) we still allow semiautomatic weapons to be purchased is sick, it’s just sick. It has no social redeeming value, zero, none. Not a single, solitary rationale for it,” Biden told reporters during a brief gaggle outside the Nantucket Fire Department in Massachusetts, where he greeted first responders.>>>

So President Joe Biden wants to ban all semi-automatic firearms, just like what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is actually doing in Canada presently. The problem Joe Biden has is the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, an amendment which specifically states that the fundamental ''right" of the people to keep and bear arms "shall not'' be infringed.

That Second Amendment is certainly a problem for those whom seek to empower government with a monopoly on the use of force and violence. In order to combat this problem they have to utilise massive propaganda and spin a fear narrative in order to divert the minds of the people away from the real reason for the existence of an armed populace, that it being a deterrent to state tyranny over the people. A massive propaganda campaign is therefore necessary to gain enough consent to override the Second Amendment's '''shall not be infringed'' limitation.

It's the common people's perception of the law that matters, not the law itself.

It's this same perception of law that allowed government officials to get away with the arbitrary and illegal exercise of power during the Covid pandemic. There were no laws allowing bureaucrats to lock people in their homes, force close their businesses, mandate mask wearing, issue fines for breaches of health orders etc. That was all colour of law and illegal. People just went along with it due to propaganda and fear.

A narrative of fear was promoted alongside the magic word of ''emergency'' to bypass actual law. There is no real fundamental difference between that fear based propaganda narrative and the one surrounding disarmament. Both narratives are designed to gain consent from a naive and all too trusting public whom wouldn't give it otherwise. This is why those in power, whom seek more power, love fear based narratives. Climate change anyone?

So why the increase in mass shootings?

Could it be due a society becoming more and more openly hostile to Godly values?

Could it be due an increase in family breakdowns leaving children lacking parental authority and guidance?

Could it be social media induced “look at me” narcissism?

Could it be the increased use in psychotropic drugs being used to deal with loneliness and depression? 

Could it be due the over stimulation and related dopamine release related to screen addiction and how that negatively effects impulse control and a loss of patience in people?

Could it be the increased coverage of shootings in the media which then implants a motive for copy cats?

I think all the above and more.

Combine the above with easy access to firearms and I think it is inevitable for such incidents to occur.

Is disarming the public the answer? Consider that as gun restrictions have incrementally increased over the years so have mass shootings. That is clear. Yet doesn't that appear to contradict a propaganda narrative of ''increase restrictions to decrease mass shootings''? Why? Well, it's because we ought not take data points in isolation thus removing them from their context.  The specific points made above combined with the easy access to firearms have produced an increase in mass shootings, not merely easy access to firearms in isolation.

The propaganda aimed to convince the people to disarm themselves is the "solution in a vacuum" much as "vaccine only" was the propagandised ''solution in a vacuum'' for the Covid Pandemic. The people are steered towards a singular focus solution (ie. civilian disarmament) which in reality is something to their complete detriment (monopolistic state power/authoritarianism). 

Therefore is disarming the people really a good idea? Is providing the state with a monopoly on the use of violence really the answer? A state apparatus consisting of people prone to the same increasing narcissism, godlessness and drug use as everyone else. Furthermore, combine all that with the additional trait of a desire to exercise power and impose one's will upon others.

Give those people a monopoly on the use of violence?

That’s just stupid!

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.'' John Adams, To Massachusetts Militia, 11 October 1798

No comments:

Post a Comment