President Obama just went over congress’ heads, again. It’s going to get harder and harder for Americans to aquire firearms.
The missing link in all gun (firearm) stories portrayed on the MSM is mental health. The issue of mental health is often mentioned as some sort of justification but never examined.
There is no difference between having one’s firearms confiscated for no reason and having them confiscated for an accusation of mental health. In some cases, the claim may be legitimate, nevertheless, when an accusation of failing mental health is all that is needed in order to strip someone of their rights, who is to say that this power cannot and will not be used arbitrarily. Indeed, there have been many instances in which it has. Mental health issues have been used to take people’s children, lock people up indefinitely, and have the very basis of certain legal cases discounted and thrown out. There are certainly those who are a danger to themselves and others, but using this argument against everyone in order to limit the public availability of firearms is disingenuous and unreasonable.
[This point is brought to light when one considers that very large multi-national corporations such as Serco control the mental health industry, the prison system, as well as adoption and child services, all at once. A military contractor, they also control Britain’s entire nuclear arsenal, their airports, and a good deal of the British economy. It helps that they have contacts with parliament.]
The notion of ‘pre-crime’ goes against all the democratic foundations of our system of government. The case of Sammy Yatim demonstrates this perfectly. One can be in a restaurant with thirty other people holding a steak knife and not be considered a threat, but on a bus it is a whole different matter. Even though everyone was let off the bus safely, Sammy Yatim was killed for exposing himself and holding a three inch knife in a threatening manner. He was obviously not there to kill anybody. He was clearly frustrated, distressed, and crying out for help. Isn’t helping people in that situation what the police are supposed to do? There were many different non-lethal options available to the armour-clad police, and none of them were in any danger. This begs the question, why was he shot eight times before being tasered.
Clearly, a great deal of gun violence is attributable to suicide, as are a great many police shootings. It must be assumed that this would have been accomplished with or without guns. Most young people don’t shoot themselves, anyway.
Guns are offensive weapons. Unfortunately, the only way to defend against them is to shoot back. The Swiss have a high rate of gun ownership and a very low murder rate. Swiss army chief André Blattmann advises the Swiss people to arm themselves in the face of social unrest. The US is doing the opposite. Why? Over 99.9% of all ammunition is expended in non-criminal and non-violent (unless you are a deer) activities. Guns, therefore, must serve a useful purpose. Cars are more dangerous. The environmentalists will have their hands full taking people’s cars away, too.
Besides, do you really think that a young adult with social issues and no friends whose violence was attributed to video games can’t pull off a hit rate better than 17%?