Gun Control: Wounds, Part II.

Gun Control creates wounds all its own. Gun control creates heartbreak. It creates immense numbers of injuries, both emotional and physical. Gun control creates a tyranny that is the worst injury of all: abuse of the law and the destruction of the United States.

In my last essay, I addressed the central point of Dr. Adams who observed that law enforcement officers who must shoot the suspect in their duty suffer wounds he as a police surgeon did not expect to see: emotional trauma. I had posted that gun owners have long been keenly aware of how traumatizing such an action is long before the doctor noticed it. To our way of thinking, having to shoot is a grave decision made in the face of grave danger, with the otherwise only alternative being to suffer the more severe trauma of rape, a mayhem, an abduction or murder. All gun control which seeks to discourage fighting back states that it's better to be beaten to death or to be abducted than to have to stop them with lethal force and live with that action. As I said last week, how can you refuse to fight back because of how it will make you feel? It could make you feel alive. Glad to be alive. Gun control creates its own wounds of one-sided brutality in deleting the authority of the citizen to act in time of danger.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is the mission of gun control worldwide, and this is the goal of all actions against the United States: to talk you out of your liberty and sovereign authority. Gun control is a bluff, a fraud which says, in this case, that you will only hurt yourself emotionally if you shoot someone in self-defense. As I say often, Why don't you let us worry about that?

Let's look at this nonsense a sec. Gun owners are not taught to shoot to kill, but to shoot to stop. This is because less-than-lethal doesn't cut it. LTL doesn't stop aggressors on drugs, armed aggression, stalking and surprise aggression, multiple assailants, nor does it stop a lot of aggression which rises to the level of grave danger. In discouraging serious-minded preparedness, the anti-violence minions lose sight of the main goal: survival. I mean, if you're going to refuse to fight back because it's disgusting, you've made a poor choice in terms of survival.

Darwinism.

This tiny little suggestion that fighting back is violence is part of a larger rot placed within the bark of the tree of liberty in the United States to rot through self-rule. It takes you out of the equation in who will win the fight for your life when you are stalked, or taken. Or does the anti-violent minion place a bet that the attack won't be that bad? The anti-violent are coached that to fight back is to get down into the gutter with the aggressor (as if this is a bad thing). I'll get muddy with raw sewage if it means protecting myself and loved ones. About 90 million gun owners are likely fully prepared for that eventuality in spite of the awareness of how they will work through having shot another person. That's a lot of adults. That's a lot of voters, and it's not a gun lobby, it's the voters themselves.

America's greatest successes have quite often come from the willingness to get into the gutter and its sewage because that is where the fight is and how the predators get in unchecked, if by sewage you mean both the filth of it and the trauma of what you had to do.

But, you don't find violence, it finds you. At this time, describing self-defense as getting down into the gutter with thugs and describing fighting back as begging for your own trauma is sufficient to disarm citizens of personal resolve, knowledge, and spirit of survival. It creates self-doubt. It weaponizes it. In my surmise, this refusal to suffer the cost of surviving is largely responsible for missing persons, including adult college students.

Meanwhile, the bully and thug get a pass on personal conduct (along with others who inject rot into the tree of liberty) If we cannot fight in the slime because some people dislike slime, the predators will get us all where we live. And they are. This is how Gun Control joins crime in hurting America where she lives.

Choose: being alive and the cost of what it took to stay alive, or doing nothing and the cost to yourself and others who cry at night wondering who took you and where you are. Refusing to fight back just because it's fighting in the gutter or it may not feel good is to say you're not worth it. (Man, broken homes are really taking their toll on America, aren't they?)

Remember that self-defense is legal, moral and effective. It's not against the law and it's not bad taste in mixed company. For the snooty anti-violence types, it goes well with both fish and steak alike.

But to say that self-defense against a horrible irrevocable trauma will somehow pointlessly swap out one trauma for another is just a dirty trick against self-rule. Dirty. It is a stealth and very personal contempt for you and your country.

Gun control talks about how you will regret stopping someone who wanted to kill you, that you'll have to live with yourself for what you had to do to stay alive.

Why don't you let us worry about that?

Be sure to register for my Safer Streets Newsletter.
_______________________________________________

The second amendment is not about guns, it is about how we carry our own burdens so that government will not attempt to substitute itself for citizen power and authority. Safe Streets In The Nationwide Concealed Carry Of Handguns, (Hardcover), is now available online as an e-book.