Idiocracy, the Art of Making Bad Laws (Gun Control)

american-justice2-1

One word should always make you shudder: “control.” No, it’s not a bad word. Control, as defined under the terms of human beings trying to control other human beings, falls into the category of fictitious words that don’t actually have any real meaning. It’s an easy word to use but a far more difficult word to functionally and technically apply. You cannot ‘control’ another person. Their thoughts, feelings, and actions are their own. Human beings bare many unique traits that make control an impossibility, such as obstinate, defiant, free-will, perseverance, and so on. While it is possible to tell people what to do and then have them do it, the final choice – the ultimate decision – is made by that individual. This brings us to the hot point for today’s discussion: “Gun Control.”

By itself, the words ‘gun control’ are very clear and well-formed. One who handles and utilizes a gun with a fine-tuned degree of accuracy and skill clearly exhibits good, ‘gun control.’ Trying to make somebody not lie, cheat, or steal to purchase a gun is not ‘gun control’. Just because there are strict laws against murder and theft, we do not title these as ‘life stopping-control’ or ‘stealing-control’.  Instead, we come up with words such as ‘murder,’ and ‘theft.’ And, that’s where the new, so-called ‘gun-control,’ legislation belongs, under theft and murder laws. After all, that’s what Legislatures are trying to prevent. But, do the words really matter that much or is this just trivial?

9f77a53d4e7b346fe170f15e059f1330

Well, ask a million “LGBT” folks who freak out and hold mass protests and force law changes in defiance of Democracy just because someone used a derogatory term or insulted one of their particular gender preference. Or, perhaps you can ask the “Black Lives Matter” folks, or “Muslims,” or countless others if words alone can cause a lot of harm. Frankly, it’s ridiculous, but that is the state of America: Ridiculous.

So, for example, there’s no need to control hunters who legally hunt wild animals in the forest, only their ‘hunting’ activities to stay within the bounds of the current ecosystem. How would an umbrella law harm or impeded them? What about citizens who carry weapons for their own, personal protection and would otherwise never use them to harm an innocent person? How would an umbrella law harm or impeded them? Sure – there’s a million arguments to make like, “What if somebody stole their gun?”, or “What if they decided to radicalize?” Yeah, well, what if an asteroid “decided” to get knocked off course and accidentally hit the Earth tomorrow. Or what if you owned a kitchen knife and somebody stole that? Or what if they stole your car and ran someone over. Or what if … what could be … what isn’t … etc. etc. etc. You can make a million laws about it – but in the end, those were extreme situations that are less likely to happen than an idiot on their cell phone hitting you because they wanted to reply “LOL” to a tweet, or the guy who crossed lanes in his expensive automobile and hit an oncoming driver head on killing himself and their ten year old daughter? No guns there … so where’s “car-control?” How have laws “controlled” people? Starting to see the point in the failure of believing that just because we make a law doesn’t mean that people automatically transform their brains into compliance mode? That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t make laws – that means that people will be people – and laws need to be better thought out – not rash. And, like it or not – some people can just be dumb … period!

In Oregon, one of the Senators said today, “It’s imperative we keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists.” Let’s examine this, shall we?

Keeping guns out of the hands of terrorists: It’s a well known fact that international terrorists get their weapons internationally from the stock that’s left behind by troops, including U.S. troops, due to the wasteful laws that abuse taxpayer dollars for corporate America. National terrorists have hordes of caches, 3-D printers, and even their own forges at home to make what they want, and if not, they have a black market. Very rarely has there been a time a terrorist (which is a stupid, umbrella definition used today for criminals that go above and beyond with their killing), has purchased their gun from a store like Walmart and then gone on a killing spree (and by rare – I mean once or twice in history – literally). Most guns purchased at gun shows still happen without background checks.Just because one guy goes nuts is no reason for an entire nation to make mass, umbrella legislation that interferes in the course of peaceful and law-abiding activities of everyday citizens. If this country were attacked – you’d do well to have a friend who owns weapons because getting out, getting around, or getting to safety will require that.

And, background checks for “terrorists” is a fallacy. Nobody has “terrorist” marked on their record. There’s supposedly a ‘no-fly’ list (another stupid government label), that identifies the biggest ‘at-risk’ folks. This is probably a good thing. But, then it comes down to background checks, period. Unfortunately, most shootings that take place in America, regardless of what you hear on the news or media, or not by well-known criminals. The large majority of shootings are by first-timers or people that just haven’t been caught yet. So, “background” checks will only help to keep honest people honest and encourage more underground dealings on the black market although, for now, they are at least the best, viable solution WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE.

Keeping guns out of the hands of criminals: This was a blatantly arrogant and dumb statement. What the Senator meant on one hand was keeping guns out of the hands like the guy who just went on a shooting rampage in Florida because his actions were, ‘criminal.’ But, what sort of law could EVER be implemented to stop a U.S. citizen with no criminal background from buying weapons? Massive … failure … statement. On the other hand, the Senator meant that he wanted to keep weapons away from known criminals. This is a failure on multiple counts. First off, as previously noted, most shootings take place by people who have not yet been caught or are first time shooters. Criminals who have been tried and convicted come in 1 of 2 categories: those with recidivism and those without it. Repeat offenders should be on a ‘no-fly’ list – unquestioned. Offenders who made a mistake once in their life … well … that’s one of the many humiliating and disgusting sides of American life: the failure of the Justice System to uphold the Congressional bonds of justice. Once having paid for one’s crime – it should be done.

But, it’s not.

Registries, anti-travel laws, and anti-gun ownership laws place felons in very bad situations. Once having made a mistake (especially one that in no way involved guns), people who are caught pay the price. Yet, laws that keep people registered and take away their freedom permanently are akin to cruel and unusual punishment. Did you ever make a mistake? I bet so. In fact, not one person alive today has gone without making a mistake, or saying the wrong thing, or doing something stupid that didn’t hurt someone else in some way. You’re not spending the rest of your life paying for it. What’s the point in learning from mistakes to go forward and do better in life if people are not given that opportunity? Many of these laws are based on examples of international laws in countries where the circumstances are so substantially different that relying on them is a practice in absolute foolishness. A second dysfunction of keeping guns out of the hands of once-upon-a-time convicted felons is that they have lost the ability to protect themselves and their families. They cannot hunt. They cannot share in the same, basic freedoms as every other mistake-maker in America.

Why?

If you were to look at the statistics of offenders who become repeat offenders because they’re forced into bad situations due to the laws – it would be mind staggering. As a resource specialist helping people with these types of backgrounds I knew of a man who broke into a school and sat in the middle of the floor with his arms up, waiting for the authorities to come and take him back to jail. He didn’t want to go and was terrified. But, the laws that continually prevent him from getting a job because employers see a felony background and that’s it – it’s over – no job. He was literally starving to death. His crime? He smoked pot once. Another gentleman who fought the Oregon Legislature to regain his gun rights so he could take his grandson hunting lost the permanent right to bear arms because of his felon. At 50 years of age, a check to his landlords bounced. In Oregon, that’s a felony crime under fraud. It doesn’t matter if it’s their fault – or the bank’s. So – why is he barred from ever carrying a gun again?

quote-america-needs-fewer-laws-not-more-prisons-by-trying-to-seize-far-more-power-than-is-necessary-james-bovard-212664

The Senators of this country trying to force ‘gun control’ under that very asinine premise that they can control human behavior are more harmful to the state of the USA than the people living in it. There are some situations that need better regulations. For example, gun shows should be held to the same level as other gun sellers since people who are interested in buying can pay for their own background checks through the coordinators of the gun show WELL in advance and then bring their paperwork in. Then, there would be no delay in them purchasing guns. And, authorities who are gun-ho and out to bust people because they have mental issues would know well in advance who’s getting them and will know who to watch.

'I actually wanted to open a lemonade stand, but there was too much red tape and regulation...'
‘I actually wanted to open a lemonade stand, but there was too much red tape and regulation…’

But, banning guns and inviting in unregistered and illegal immigrants from a war-torn country whose citizens believe that people of other faiths are violators of a creator’s law and should die – is idiocracy at its finest. Don’t be ignorant about America’s early years. After the ‘settlers’ of the U.S. had set up shop – newcomers were monitored (it’s called Ellis Island). People weren’t ever haphazardly “let in” after the government was put into place. People ‘got in’, yes – but then again – America had a lot of problems because of that.

So – what happens when you take away all the guns?

Well, the authorities have guns, right? After all … there’s never been any concern about the abuse of power in the hands of a simple ‘human being,’ capable of just as many criminal thinking errors as anyone else … at least if you want to live in a fairy tale world where you shouldn’t be voting for the rest of the country. Of course, no one would ever resort to using any other type of weapon, like say, bombs or grenades … sort of. Imagine how much worse the death toll and damage would have been in Florida if the killer had tossed twenty hand grenades through the crowd? In case you can’t imagine that, look up the marathon in New York – it would have been MUCH, MUCH worse. By the time anyone hears the explosive sound of a bomb or grenade – it’s too late. And, of course, there’s no chance an underground black market would boom, right? WRONG. Just ask the authorities – they deal with that garbage every day.

stupid-laws-630x333

What’s the solution? Clearly – there is no easy solution. But, we do have a choice. We can play global thermal nuclear warfare out to its conclusion and see what happens, or we can sit down and play a nice game of chess. In other words, Congress shouldn’t be acting rash simply because they want their constituents to vote for them and use this as fodder for their political warfare during the election. Right now, until some new and very thoroughly detailed Legislation is considered that acknowledges the fallacy of controlling people and focuses instead on the ability to control weapon distribution, changing the laws against innocents and people who have proven their commitment to better lives, nothing should be done.

Yep – nothing.

I know. I know. I am not properly conforming with that answer. We all live in a solve-it-now, do-it-now, fix-it-now and care about the consequences of rash decisions after people are hurt, ‘society.’ Hopefully, you’ll find patience with my suggestion. Right now though, as voters, it’s imperative to let our constituents, and newspapers know that it’s okay NOT to overreact and do something stupid. We need to acknowledge that there are bad people in the world and no matter how much we try to control them and make a utopia where everything’s perfect, there will still be bad people in the world. After all, even if you get rid of all the predators that won’t stop the sheep from taking their place!!

Think about it! Do something! Don’t be apathetic! 🙂

A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?

Advertisements

One thought on “Idiocracy, the Art of Making Bad Laws (Gun Control)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s