Dear Friends,
I wonder what form of violence is worse then all the others? It appears that our political elite have made the decision that gun violence is far worse than all the others combined. Our government and a large portion of the American electorate are willing to throw the Constitution under the bus to limit gun violence by a few percentage points. Even though statistics show that where guns are outlawed violent crime skyrockets. Gun crime does go down however. Leading to the inevitable conclusion, that the political elite are willing for more violence in our society, to limit the violence of guns. If you are willing to trade your Constitutional protections, for a more violent society where you have no right to defend yourself, so that a very few percentage points of gun violence can be shaved off, this is probably not the blog for you. Continue trusting those who have proven themselves untrustworthy over and over…
There is an old saying, there are three kinds of liars, white liars who will lie to you so you can save face, bold face liars who lie when the truth would serve them better, and statisticians. Australia enacted a gun ban back in 1997. Since then the incidence of gun crime has gone down. The unbiased media exclaim this as if it were the end of the story. Too bad life isn’t that simple. The reality is, while there was a statistical decrease in gun related violence, violent crime went up over 40%! Britain experienced similar results. Their gun ban lowered gun crime but all other forms of violent crime went up drastically. Moreover, some of that decrease in gun violence almost certainly came about do to people not defending themselves with a gun, and instead were violated in some way.
Statistics about gun crime include homeowners defending themselves and their loved ones with guns. The home owner who protects his family with a gun is lumped into the same statistic as a maniac shooting up a school. Disarmed people who can no longer defend their homes from criminals, form some portion of the drop in gun violence in countries, that have outlawed self defense with a gun. Britain has gone over the deep end on this, even charging people who survive a murder attempt by brandishing a shotgun, with a crime. Apparently the British political elite believe it is the duty of a British citizen to die at the hands of an attacker. To promote attacks I suppose?
I ask you, is gun violence worse, the same or better, than other forms of violence? We have established that where guns are outlawed, gun violence decreases, but other forms of violent crimes increase dramatically. Therefore the real debate, (the one we are not engaging in), is whether or not gun crime is worse than other forms of violence. Is it better to be abducted, raped and murdered than to be shot? Is it better to be pulled apart by horses, (as Alexander did the Persian traitor), than to be shot? Would you rather your loved one be strangled, in his or her home by an intruder, than for them to potentially kill that intruder with a gun? Is it better to have your throat slit? The government, it would seem, is more interested in the attacker’s right to murder, rape and mutilate, than for law abiding citizens to defend themselves. The question has been answered by the political elite in the affirmative. They believe gun violence trumps all other forms of violence, and are willing to have more absolute violence, for a bit less gun violence.
The most often used murder weapon in the US is a box cutter. More people are killed by having their throat slit than being shot. Exponentially more children are killed every year on bicycles than are shot. So, taking these two things into account, if violence were the aim of our political elite, they would outlaw box cutters and bicycles. That they don’t is another indication that they believe that gun violence is far worse than any other way people are killed. Again, proving that the political elite are indifferent to violence, as long as it isn’t gun violence. The unbiased media in showing in gory detail, every time someone is murdered by a gun on the front page of every newspaper in the nation, while ignoring the many more times people prevent violence with a gun, show they agree with the political elite. Their rhetoric speaks louder then their words.
The debate continues however. Due to the intractability of the American people in wanting the right of self defense and in not having their Second Amendment protections taken away. The political elite as well unbiased media, agree that more violence in our society is a small price to pay, to shave a few points off gun violence. I suspect there is another motivation however. Perhaps the Elite in politics, culture and the media, have another agenda. To exchange more violence for less violence, would seem a poor trade, so for intelligent people to want to take that path, insinuates that there is something more at work here. If we agree that they probably don’t want more violence, but are willing to create the conditions where more violence in our society is inevitable, they must have something in mind other than what their rhetoric would indicate. Therefore, they must be lying about their intentions, there is no other logical conclusion that can be reached. Could it possible be, their real aim is our Constitutional protections, and if that is the case, are they working in our interests… or their own narrow personal interests? At our expense.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
