“Over the last fifty years, it’s the Left that has assaulted every moral norm and disdained every religious and cultural restraint.”  Andrew Klavan

George Rebane

Student groups across the land are now forming to protest the ownership and availability of guns in America.  Their tearful yet uninformed emotions will supply more grist for grinding down the Second Amendment in the name of ‘saving the children’.  I don’t want to re-circle the barn on all the arguments that correctly point out that no new gun control law suggested by the Left would have prevented the Parkland massacre.

I gave my views on a reasonable approach to preventing such shootings in ‘Stopping School Shooters’.  We know it works because it is successfully applied in Israel and at the schools to which the elites send their kids.  However, the peasant children can serve a far more useful role for the elites as pawns – to sacrifice in their schools, or parade for the press where they can influence the country’s neurochallenged, a new term to join ‘neurodiverse’, ‘neurotypical’, ‘neurodivergent’ … introduced by leftwing academicians (more here).

The only thing that I’ve heard which merits discussion and possible immediate implementation are the so-called Red Flag laws.  Five states have these which allow a family member, who is almost always aware of a developing situation, to alert authorities who can then temporarily but immediately remove access to guns by the disturbed individual.  The removal of the guns is not permanent, and their return depends on how the case is subsequently diagnosed and adjudicated.  Bottom line, it is those close to the individual who can nip a developing situation in the bud, and thereby prevent a suicide or a tragic shooting like in Parkland.

California’s crazy and crazier gun laws are Exhibit A in all this, especially as it applies to the constructive prohibition of ‘assault rifles’, specifically the AR-15 variants.  Never mind that this gun is rarely used by criminals, and that ‘gun violence’ has been decreasing over the last 25 years.  Our state’s continuing path toward confiscation will have as much impact on the Parkland type shootings as its climate change laws have on global warming.

The answer, as most students of the contemporary American scene know, lies in the disintegration of what used to be our common culture.  NY Post columnist Arnold Ahlert collects these thoughts in his ‘It’s the Culture, Not the Guns’.  There he makes the case that “Leftists want to restrict the entire conversation to gun control. But their destruction of culture is the culprit.”

In the final analysis, the cost of living free means living with risks.  And removing risks inevitably redeems our liberties, which itself is useful for powering elitist agendas.  Everything has a price, which includes returning to tyrannical autocracies like the many states of the 20^th century, today survived by North Korea, Cuba, China, Vietnam, … and now joined by Russia and Venezuela.  The gun control issue, along with several others (e.g. federally funded abortion, free speech, religion and state, …), was and always will be about the new world order under control of the elites. 

[21feb18 update]  Subsequent to my comment on the role of par force in a free society, the comment stream below took up the thread and expanded on it, but so far without much profit from examining it in a reasonable manner.  I responded with the following which I now post here as a needed update to the above commentary.

Sadly none of the Left have read my piece on par force, let alone understand its main tenet. All the above horseshit about grenades and tanks and private armies attests to that. The function of civilians possessing par force with the local constabulary is that the state cannot quickly snuff out or shut down legitimate protest against the rogue/illegal behavior of state agents/agencies (in the well-practiced manner of totalitarian countries). That people so aggrieved have the means to gather, hold off authorities long enough for the word to get out to other citizens across the land who then decide to join the resistance, or demur and let the initially aggrieved be taken by the state’s eventual superior force and face the full consequences of their ill-advised (or ill-timed) opposition. Without such available par force, there is no chance of such penultimate resistance. This has been demonstrated time and again during the last two centuries.

The last beneficial use of par force was the recent Bundy ranch standoff. It brought (and continues to bring) attention to an aspect of government overreach that would have been buried in the courts had not the Bundy family and their many compatriots (some travelling hundreds of miles to join them with their arms) been willing to risk their lives to draw attention to what they believed was rank injustice. A free people should always have the means to exercise their will through par force when they feel the established legal avenues no longer work. A nation of disarmed sheeple no longer have that option, for they have become the herded and compliant livestock of the state.

And here is what a reasoned, researched, and referenced response looks like in this debate written by Ignatius Piazza, head of Front Sight, a well-known firearms training firm – Download FrontSight.  The Left is invited to submit their best equivalent – I will post it here.