Articles Comments

SENTRY JOURNAL » Uncategorized » Individual Needs

Individual Needs

I refrained from writing anything related to the Arizona shooting in fear that I would somehow politicize the terrible event.  People lost their lives and another’s hangs in the balance, yet we use them as weights on our political scales.  It wasn’t even hours after the shooting that the left started digging for some way to tie this to conservatives and set their crosshairs (figurative) on Palin.  This is, of course, just a pathetic attempt to delegitimize the conservative, tea party, and/or republican movement – none of which this nut is or was ever a part of.

It also didn’t take long for this tragedy to turn into an opportunity.  Sen. Frank Lautenberg has already moved to ban high-capacity ammunition clips like the one used in the Arizona shooting.  The argument is that such clips are unnecessary and in the hands of a violent person can be used to cause great harm.  The media is going bonkers over both the details of this terrible event and the political outcomes.  Overnight the fiscal concerns of this nation dwindled while gun control and political rhetoric burst to the forefront of all that is opinionated.

While listening to a local call in talk show (nowhere near Arizona), individuals were in a panic regarding our laws, regulations, and rights.  The gun control debate was prominent, and in that, one query kept echoing, “Why do people need such weapons?”  The question in itself says so much about our state of mind, the failures of 2nd amendment protectors, and the success of those who neither love nor understand freedom.  The question shows that individualism is fading. 

When did America begin to question why someone wants something as opposed to why they can’t have it?  It doesn’t matter why someone wants a larger magazine clip.  Why do they have to justify it to anyone?  The question of justifying your desires is dangerous because it gives power to a democratic motion – that is to say, the majority who find your peculiar cravings distasteful, may someday take them away from you through mob rule.

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner.  Liberty is a well-armed lamb.  ~Benjamin Franklin

Shortly after the bailouts the sentiments toward the rich in this nation went downhill fast.  While some, no doubt, deserved the negative response, the feeling toward the whole quickly went sour.  The same natured questions were being raised then about the rich as are now being raised about gun owners.  Some that come to mind are, “Who needs to make more than a million dollars?”, “Why do they need such large bonuses?” Once again the minority must justify themselves to the mob.

Surely this doesn’t affect you as you are not likely a millionaire and probably have no palate for what the government deems assault rifles.  Step out of the box for a moment and consider that big house you’ve had your eye on, the Corvette you’ve been saving for, or that UFC fight you want to attend.  Who needs such a big house, expensive car, or crude entertainment?  Let a true democracy rule and you’ll find too often that you’re the lamb in the den of wolves.

We are not a democracy, but a republic and for good reason.  True democracies are susceptible to trends and fears.  They, like the progressives, are reactionary.  Reaction can be good, but when the movement becomes stronger than any opposing minority, a quick reactionary flood can wash away all reason and debate.  In essence, a true democratic movement can become totalitarian….well, to the dissenter.    

One man with courage is a majority. ~Thomas Jefferson

Share
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
RightHandMan

Written by

Yeah, I tweet. If you want to follow me on Twitter, just click on the link below. I hope you do.

Filed under: Uncategorized

opinions powered by SendLove.to
Comments
  • Paul January 13, 2011 at 3:55 AM

    Elements within both sides of the political spectrum have definitely been guilty of using over the top rhetoric and personal attacks on their opponents. Unless the person you are running against actually IS Hitler, don’t call them Hitler. This is something that the left needs to learn in particular. Your disagree with your opponent, direct your efforts to convincing the electorate why you are right and they are wrong… their supporters might even end up agreeing with you.
    Paul recently posted..How 50Cent Made 10m With TwitterMy Profile

  • Colin January 13, 2011 at 5:33 AM

    Excellent! I especially like how you explained the faults of a true democracy.

    If I might throw in my two cents for anyone wondering about the efficacy of large capacity clips (disclaimer, my personal defense weapon is a snubby .38, 5 rounds). It is terribly difficult to shoot someone, as evidenced by the Florida psycho who shot at the city council point blank and didn’t hit anyone. That is a good thing for the most part, but bad when you are actually trying to defend yourself from a would-be assailant. Most people do not have the training, nor the inclination to properly train themselves in accurate handgun shooting, thus the more rounds you have, the more chance you have of actually hitting your target. Again, despite what the MSM would have you think, most guns in America are NOT used to shoot innocent people, in fact, most sit unused in law-abiding citizens homes. If we think to the original purpose of why these people purchased a weapon, “self-defense” it only makes sense they should have as many rounds as possible to accomplish the mission. Arbitrarily limiting the number of bullets they have at their disposal defeats the purpose. The only people these clip-limiting rules harm is once again, the law-abiding citizen who has no intention of opening up on a crowd, which by the way is very easy to hit. A gunmen with one bullet could probably score a hit on a tightly packed crowd.
    Colin recently posted..Funny Video of the Day – Jan 13thMy Profile

    • RightHandMan
      RightHandMan January 13, 2011 at 10:03 PM

      Worthy points Colin. I strayed away from arguing the specific points on those specific gun control arguments (or defenses) because I didn’t want to take away from the underlying argument – that those desires shouldn’t have to be justified…even if they can be.

  • Mike January 13, 2011 at 5:59 AM

    When will people just learn to say…”The Second Amendment is my gun permit” and leave it at that. A person shouldn’t have to explain or defend themselves to anyone about why they have guns and ammunition.

    And my personal preference is a single action .44 Magnum with a 7 1/2″ barrel for home defense and a SA .22 Magnum in my truck. 😉

    Mike
    Mike recently posted..Snow present in 49 of the 50 US statesMy Profile

    • RightHandMan
      RightHandMan January 13, 2011 at 10:03 PM

      You got the spirit of the post Mike. Thanks for the comment.

  • LD Jackson January 13, 2011 at 6:46 AM

    On the subject of the high capacity clip, anyone who has practiced even a little can change out a clip in about a second. This is nothing but an excuse to come at our gun rights from a different angle. Even the police officers I know admit that the clips are nothing to be concerned about.
    LD Jackson recently posted..Arizona Citizens Ban Together Against The Westboro Baptist ChurchMy Profile

    • RightHandMan
      RightHandMan January 13, 2011 at 10:04 PM

      And anyone with a brain can tell you a pellet gun shaped like an M16 isn’t an assault rifle.

  • Bunkerville January 13, 2011 at 7:39 AM

    Once again, the rights of the majority should be abridged for the minority, so it seems. In this case, a fraction of the minority. Let’s correct what is wrong with the fraction and leave the majority alone.
    Bunkerville recently posted..YWCA becomes ‘Platform 51′ in Great BritainMy Profile

  • RC January 13, 2011 at 10:33 AM

    Excellent article! This points out what people never seem to understand, what happens when the shoe is on the other foot? Republicans have done it with Obama by suddenly complaining about many powers that he has that Bush had as well. Democrats do it in the exact same way by not complaining about Obama having those powers when they whined about Bush. If the federal government was simply restricted to how the Constitution defines it, we would not have nearly as many discussions like this.

    • RightHandMan
      RightHandMan January 13, 2011 at 10:05 PM

      Indeed. Orin Hatch sent out a tweet asking for 3 bill ideas he could try and push for in the Senate…I argued for less bills. If only they understood the simplicity of it.

  • Steve Dennis January 13, 2011 at 7:30 PM

    Great post! While I do not want or need a high capacity magazine for my handgun it is not my right to say that because I don’t want it that someone else can’t have it. While this may seem like an innocent enough piece of legislation the fact is that it still speaks to the mindset in this country–as you said–when it comes to the constitution. People are too willing to give up aspects of the constitution if they do not affect them while forgetting that they are taking away the rights of others.
    I am always aggrivated when I hear people call our form of government a democracy–the president did it last night, and policians do it all the time–if they do not understand our form of government how can we expect them to understand the way it is supposed to work?!
    Steve Dennis recently posted..Merry Christmas everybody!My Profile

    • RightHandMan
      RightHandMan January 13, 2011 at 10:08 PM

      When you hit the patella below the knee there is a reflex signal that goes up to the brain stem (I believe the pons) and then back to the knee. It actually doesn’t go to the brain until the leg moves. It’s a built in mechanism that allows your body to react to danger (touch something hot – move hand – then comprehend the situation). Reaction doesn’t take thought.

  • Teresa January 13, 2011 at 9:05 PM

    Great post! I do not even own a gun but I am not going to act out of jealousy or the false notion that gun laws protect us from the criminals and say that people don’t need magazine clips or any type of gun because that wouldn’t be right or logical. The second amendment provides the right to bear arms to Americans and there should be no need for any gun owner to explain to another person why he/she owns this or that rifle or gun, or how many guns that person owns. The only people that gun laws protect are criminals and we shouldn’t be aiding them in any capacity. The wolves are chomping at the bit and now we must muzzle them and their anti-constitutional plans to infringe upon gun rights.
    Teresa recently posted..SICKOS Want Sarah Palin Dead- Twitter Users Wish Death on PalinMy Profile

    • RightHandMan
      RightHandMan January 13, 2011 at 10:09 PM

      I would say that the teeth of wolves are no match for a well armed sheep…but that might be taken as propagation of violence.

  • S. Prescott January 13, 2011 at 9:17 PM

    Every time a tragedy like this happens politicians call for more gun control. The problem is, criminals don’t follow gun laws. Who really thinks that gang members get their guns from gun stores, wait their 10 days and then register them? If they were really serious about controlling gun violence they would put more police officers on the streets to enforce the laws already on the books.

    I find it funny though that everytime liberals bring up gun control handgun sales double. If politicians were serious about saving lives they would do something about cars. There are almost twice as many traffic fatalities every year as there are gun deaths.

  • RightHandMan
    RightHandMan January 13, 2011 at 10:13 PM

    They do a lot about cars too. Don’t you know, their legislation saves us from all kinds of harms. I’m looking forward to the new legislation that is going to be proposed that requires new cars have cell phone blockers installed in the car.

    The point about handgun sales is funny. Irony can best be understood after a healthy dose of political science.

  • […] Individual Needs […]

  • […] Sentry Journal – excellent post from RHM about our rights and how they are susceptible to the needs and wants of the masses […]