The Solution To Mass Shootings Is & Always Will Be Armed Citizens

Opinion
Antigun Rhetoric Won’t Stop Violent Crime; It Only Encourages It…

New York – -(AmmoLand.com)- It never takes long for Joe Biden, the symbol and embodiment of Democrat-Party incompetence and irascibility, to launch into tiresome tirades over guns.

On May 24th, 2022, the same day a lunatic went on a rampage at an elementary school 80 miles Southwest of San Antonio, the puppet masters’ propagandists drafted up a speech for Biden to deliver to the Nation. Reuters reported his words:

“‘As a nation, we have to ask, ‘When in God’s name are we going to stand up to the gun lobby?’ Biden said on national television, suggesting reinstating a U.S. ban on assault-style weapons and other ‘common sense gun laws.’ . . . ‘I hoped when I became president I would not have to do this, again,’ a visibly shaken Biden said, decrying the death of ‘beautiful, innocent’ second, third and fourth graders in ‘another massacre.’”

Pay close attention to the buzzwords:

• ‘Gun Lobby’
• ‘Assault weapons’
• ‘Common sense gun laws’

Also, consider what’s missing in Biden’s speech. There’s no mention, explicit or tacit, of effective school security measures that, had they been implemented, would have surely blunted the attack.

The killer simply walked into the school, into a classroom, and commenced shooting. Had not a police officer arrived quickly on the scene, killing the attacker, many more innocent children and teachers would likely have been injured or killed. See, e.g., KHOU local news report.

Did Biden’s handlers inform him the shooter had simply walked into an unguarded, unlocked school?

If not, did Biden bother to ask how the shooter could gain easy access to a school after incidents like this had happened in Schools in the past? Likely not.

Biden receives his speech and dutifully recites his lines as best he can, in his debilitated physical and mental state.

Still, one would think the matter of school safety and security would have warranted at least some mention after the incident at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, in 2012, and would have seen rapid implementation certainly after the subsequent major shooting incident at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, in 2018.

Yet, the need for school security is routinely ignored by the present Administration and by the Democrat-Party-controlled Congress, and by Democrat-Party-controlled jurisdictions across the Country.

But the public does hear often and vociferously that guns are to be blamed; that there are too many guns in the Country; that the Country needs more antigun laws; and that good Americans should rage, and rage some more, over the prevalence of guns in the country, and over those Americans who insist on possessing so called “assault weapons.”

It is curious, though, that the public hears little if any news about infants and toddlers, mostly black, who happen to be caught in crossfires as criminal gangs engage in shootouts in City streets, across America, on a regular basis.

But the answer to shootings in schools, on the city streets, in shopping malls, or in stores isn’t to be found in getting rid of so-called “assault weapons” in the hands of millions of citizens. And appealing to raw emotion does nothing positive. It only breeds ill-will in the citizenry and demonstrates the contempt Anti-Second Amendment politicians and the Press hold for the American public.

The answer to shooting incidents in the schools and to incidents of violent crime elsewhere in the Nation are to be found, first and foremost, in the armed citizenry. But that idea is anathema to the present Administration, and to a Democrat Party-controlled Congress, and to Democrat-controlled jurisdictions around the Country.

They refuse to acknowledge that armed citizens would blunt mass shootings and would end violent crime spikes.

The Arbalest Quarrel has written extensively on this. In respect to the school shooting incident in Florida, we said:

“A viable security plan to protect students from harm never existed in Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. But other Schools across the Nation that have implemented effective security, have been free from deadly threats to students and to teachers. That means all schools must embrace a proactive, not reactive, stance to threats of violence of any kind. A sound plan to protect students is doable and helpful. Going after guns is not.”

The police cannot be everywhere at once. In fact, in this post-George Floyd era, with incessant calls for constraining police, preventing them from protecting their communities, the need for well-trained, astute armed citizens is more urgent and acute. But the public never sees that; never hears that. Instead, Anti-Second Amendment politicians, Anti-Second Amendment policy and political action groups, the Press, and most cable and broadcast TV news networks simply reiterate the same tiresome clichés.

They talk incessantly about the need for more “commonsense gun laws.” By that, they mean de facto repeal of the Second Amendment.

They talk persistently and perniciously about the need to curb civilian-citizen ownership and possession of “assault weapons.” By that they mean a ban on semiautomatic handguns, rifles, and shotguns, across the board, and anything else they can shoehorn under that nebulous descriptor, such as revolving shotguns, and 50 caliber revolvers.

And they go on endlessly about the “gun lobby.” And by that they mean any pro-Second Amendment gun Group which, by extension, means millions of average, law-abiding citizens who exercise and cherish the fundamental, unalienable right to keep and bear arms.

One doesn’t hear, though, of mass shootings at airports, in Government buildings, or in schools across the nation where hardened security measures have been implemented, including armed security officers.

But, even if the Federal Government could lockdown the entire Country through the implementation of a massive military and police presence, Americans would never agree to that; nor should they. That isn’t our Nation’s mindset.

Most Americans would not willingly trade away their liberty for a modicum of security.

Absence of freedom and liberty is not to be found in our Nation’s history, heritage, traditions, culture, or character. Freedom and liberty runs through and is the cornerstone of all of it.

Freedom and liberty is what define us as Americans. It is part and parcel of our makeup; our identity. Americans would never agree to nor tolerate life in a Country under a constant state of siege. The ostensible cure would be worse than the disease.

Stringent control over guns and a population under constant surveillance, as evidenced in China or Singapore, is repugnant to Americans.

Yet, even as our nation moves in the direction of oppression—as Americans’ thoughts are censored, their actions monitored, their privacy invaded—as the surveillance State takes hold and tyranny become more evident and prevalent, criminal violence isn’t tapering off. It’s getting worse.

And spikes in crime are most evident in Democrat-controlled Cities such as New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and L.A., and Philadelphia, PA. Yet it is these Cities with the highest incidences of crime in the Nation that have enacted some of the most restrictive gun laws in the Nation.

These Cities are lenient toward psychopathic criminals on the one hand, and brain-addled lunatics and illegal aliens, on the other. The former have no regard for the law even if they do understand it; and the latter, lacking all comprehension of the law, cannot possibly have regard for it.

So, unlike China and Singapore—two Countries that can at least boast of relief from most violent crime—we in the United States under the domination of Democrats and RINO’s have no relief from violent crime even as the citizenry sees systematic erosion of its God-Given rights. The net result is that we have neither security nor liberty.

But even as we Americans presently have neither, the pertinent question is this: why can’t Americans have both security and liberty?

The idea, thrust on Americans by the Government, that you can have one or the other but not both is a false dichotomy. The two go together. In fact, the two are inextricably bound together.

Armed Self-Defense—against insistent and persistent dangers wrought by predatory man, predatory creature, or the predatory Government—is the well-spring of security for preservation of the Republic and preservation of Self. That same right of Armed Self-Defense is also the preeminent and elemental foundation of Freedom and Liberty, upon which all other freedoms and liberty rest.

If one is denied the exercise of the right of armed self-defense, then preservation of both Self and Country is endangered, and one is not free. Any such “freedom” that one thinks he has or is told by others that he has, in the absence of exercise of the right to keep and bear arms, is illusory.

Armed self-defense, necessary for both security of Self and “necessary for the security of a free State” is at one and the same time a basic liberty and natural law right and is codified as such in the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution.

Many of our Nation’s purported leaders don’t see the plain truth of this and, further, deny the fact of it; and too many rank and file Americans don’t see the truth either.

And the pity of it is that the rest of us, the majority of us, who are not susceptible to the delusion fostered by Government and a seditious Press must suffer the consequences just the same.

About The Arbalest Quarrel:

Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel’ website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.

For more information, visit: www.arbalestquarrel.com.