The shameless left has used the horrendous murder of schoolchildren for the crass political reason of pushing gun control, another issue near and dear to their lefty hearts.
The Sandy Hook school massacre was a terrible tragedy committed by a mentally deranged young man for reasons forever locked away in his twisted psyche. When it comes to schizophrenics and the criminally insane, reason as we know it ceases to be a factor in their mental processes. Adam Lanza’s massacre of innocent schoolchildren to satisfy his deranged whims has been universally condemned by all groups on the political spectrum. We as a nation took a collective gasp at the sheer horror of massacring elementary schoolchildren who posed no threat to anyone, and recoiled at such evil on display in our midst.
After the condemnation of this despicably evil act, the left immediately hijacked the tragedy to call for gun control in an audacious use of the tragedy for its emotional appeal. Americans were shocked by this event, and the left couldn’t waste this emotional energy by letting the country heal. No, they had to redirect this emotional energy into one of their signature issues to galvanize and mobilize their base into guilting the conservative opposition into betraying their principles to support an unconstitutional issue at odds with their very philosophy.
The use of tragic events for crass political motives requires a carefully scripted narrative of the event to highlight points that mesh well with the political agenda under consideration. This is why the narrative of the Sandy Hook massacre changed several times in the first few days after the murders. In fact, this is why the narrative of all big news events changes constantly in the immediate aftermath of the event in question. This has been pointed out by authors such as Jack Cashill to deafening silence from our complicit media busy selling themselves to the secular progressive left. Mr. Cashill has correctly pointed out that the most accurate narrative is the one that emerges just after the event occurs before the left can appropriate it for their political agenda, rewriting and controlling it to suit their ends.
We saw this control of the narrative at work on such big news events as the Lockerbie bombing, the explosion of TWA Flight 800, the Fort Hood Islamic terrorist attack, and recently in the Benghazi Embassy attack to protect the political career of Hillary Clinton while allowing President Obama to sidestep the identification of the event as a terrorist attack on the eve of the election. President Obama carefully avoided labeling any of the many attacks on our country as terrorist attacks to prevent his critics from pointing out his weakness on the terrorist issue.
Now, with the Sandy Hook massacre, the left is controlling the narrative of events to push gun control. Original reports stated that Lanza had used two semi-automatic pistols during the massacre, and that a Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle had been found in the trunk of his mother’s car in the parking lot of the school. Later, the narrative was changed to indicate that the rifle had been used so the left could push a ban on scary looking semi-automatic rifles they mislabel as “assault weapons.”
The term “assault weapon” is a portmanteau, or a coined word that blends two other words in form and meaning. An assault rifle is a fully automatic military weapon, while a weapon is anything used by one human to inflict harm on another human. An “assault weapon” is anything the left says it is, but it is not recognized in gun circles as the civilian version of a military rifle, and no military would equip its soldiers with civilian semi-automatic rifles.
The left is again going after a ban on frightening semi-automatic weapons despite the electoral drubbing they took after their first foray into these waters back in the nineties. Now, as then, Senator Diane Feinstein is leading the charge blinded by the defining moment of her life when, as president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, she became mayor after ex supervisor Dan White assassinated supervisor Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone. Ironically, Dan White was suffering from mental problems when he went on his rampage, but Feinstein drew the inaccurate lesson of gun control from the event instead of recognizing the impact of mental derangement as the defining factor in the crime spree.
The irony is that the defining moment of Feinstein’s life parallels with the Sandy Hook massacre in that mental derangement was the defining factor, but gun control is the proposed solution. The left invested heavily in promoting the rights of the mentally deranged to the point where they are no longer committed to institutions, but allowed to roam the streets and refuse their medications. State mental hospitals have been shuttered, and the mentally deranged have been relegated to the streets to fend for themselves as part of their right not to be committed for the care they are incapable of knowing they need. Their violent outbursts are met with calls for gun control instead, because it’s easier to go after guns than care for the mentally disturbed.
Senator Feinstein’s first “assault weapons” ban used the assassination attempt on President Reagan as leverage to push this flawed legislation through congress. Jim Brady, Reagan’s press secretary who was wounded in the attempt on Reagan and suffered brain damage, led support of the ban through his wife Sarah’s involvement in several high profile gun control groups, and the legislation became known as the Brady Bill. Controversy surrounded the legislation as there was no way to properly identify exactly what qualified as an “assault weapon,” and it was finally admitted by the left that these were “scary looking guns.” Another irony is the fact that John Hinckley, Jr., President Reagan’s would-be assassin, was under psychiatric care at the time of the shooting, and was later found not guilty of the crime by reason of insanity.
As one can clearly see, the defining link between these crimes and many others just like them is the mental derangement of the perpetrators and not guns. Yet, the left goes after guns like they were the cause of all of society’s ills. Could it be that they have a hidden agenda when it comes to guns? Why has the left consistently pushed gun control when mental derangement is so prevalent in the crimes they use as evidence for gun control? Why is the Second Amendment the only Constitutional amendment the left consistently attacks, while it consistently pushes to expand all the rest? These are valid questions whose answers would shed a great deal of light on the gun control debate, yet the media constantly ignores such questions. Not surprising since they are wholly owned by the left as their official mouthpiece.
The Second Amendment was included in the Constitution because our Founding Fathers recognized that their defeat of Britain would not have been possible if they had not been armed. Without arms, they would have been powerless before the tyranny of the British government. They also recognized that it is the natural tendency of government to grow and become tyrannical, no matter how well the design. The Constitution is unique in that it spells out the powers specifically forbidden to our government, vesting all other powers and liberties to We, the people. The Second Amendment is there to remind both the government and the people that this was how it was meant to be by those from whom it was designed.
The Declaration of Independence states that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, and that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Inalienable means these rights can’t be separated from the person, exist whether the person is aware of them or not, and can’t be granted or removed by any government or anyone. The Second Amendment is a reminder of this point to those who would forget and seek to infringe upon our liberty. It has nothing to do with sport or hunting, but it has everything to do with preserving the pursuit of happiness by people whose liberty is recognized as inseparable from them as part of their existence.
These are the points conservatives need to amplify in this current gun control push by those on the left whose defining purpose is big government control of our lives and its infringement on our liberties. Shameless emotional appeals for voluntary surrender of our liberty by the left must be resisted by pointed examples of curtailed freedoms by conservatives who passionately believe in the justification of their cause. The lukewarm defense of moderates will not suffice to persuade a populace ready to sacrifice liberty on the altar of perceived safety.
Gun control is about citizen control, plain and simple. It is about disarming citizens and rendering them unable to withstand the secular progressive onslaught against their liberty. A study of the events surrounding the American Revolution will reveal just how little Britain did to inflame the passions of the patriots back in the day. These patriots pledged their lives, their sacred honor, and their fortunes to resist tyranny over what seems to us today to be so little and so trivial. Our government infringes upon our liberty far more intrusively than the British government did to the patriots. Yes, the difference is that much!