- I just saw Michael Moore's Donahue guest appearance,
and I'm confused. Is our problem guns, economic, or cultural? One thing
was clear though, like so many sensible political positions, the pro gun
rights lobby suffers from a lack of instant hero immediate gratification
syndrome.
-
- Moore's American violence message is that our system
punishes rather than helps the poor; corporate America are the real crooks;
politically, and culturally, we have a shoot first, ask questions later
approach to conflict resolution; and all of the above lead to citizen gun
violence. He says, solve the economic problems, and the gun violence will
go away.
-
- Absolutely. I buy it. Lock, stock, and barrel. I'm with
you one hundred percent. Michael Moore for president.
-
- Except, why was Moore's message emphatically thematic
of gun control? How does disarming the American public solve our economic
problems? I don't see the connection except the irony of advocating disarming
innocent Americans of protection against the very elements of society he
points to as the problem.
-
- Moore advocates a run on our stagnant political leadership,
but apparently thinks, in the mean time, it's a good idea to render ourselves
vulnerable to the corporate American controlling class, and their government
enforcers, the pillars of the very thing Moore points to as the root of
our problems. Yeah Mike, we'll just lay down our arms, and politely ask
the police not to break down our doors when Bush decides conscientious
voters are a threat to national security.
-
- Of course, Moore would deny he advocates banning guns.
He thinks hunting guns are OK. But on the slippery slope that is inherent
to all decidedly controversial issues, Moore's position is dubious enough
to bear the scent of folly. Moore and "moderate" gun control
advocates like him consistently miss the point:
-
- The Right to Bear Arms is NOT a position on the politics
of hunting, animal rights, living off the land, sportsmanship, male bonding,
father/son adventures on the wild frontier. No Mike, it's not even a question
of why fathers don't take their daughters hunting more often. IT'S ABOUT
PROTECTION. It's about protection from criminals, and it's about protection
from state tyranny.
-
- Why is it we have so much trouble wrapping our heads
around this very clear motivation for The Right to Bear Arms? It's right
there in the constitution. The framers didn't sneak it in through the back
door. They were very clear on the issue. Are we blind? Are we afraid to
admit the truth? Is it contrary to our general inclinations towards peace,
harmony? Do we simply have trouble facing the cold hard fact: the potential
for tyranny is an inherent part of government, and no amount of wishful
thinking will change that.
-
- No one likes to go through life being reminded of the
potential conflicts inherent in relationships. It's not healthy. Negativity
breeds undesired self fulfilling prophecy. But pro gun lobbyists are not
the ones doing the issue mongering here. Politicians, and misguided citizens
created the gun control issue, incessantly stoke its flames, and then depict
Right to Bear Arms advocates as paranoid anti-government fanatics when
they protest in defense of our constitutional rights.
-
- It's easy to jump on the band wagon in defense of innocent
gun violence victims. Like so many paper patriots, do so and you're attributed
with instant hero status. Who doesn't advocate refraining from killing
innocent people? Answer that question and you'll have all the evidence
you need in support of The Right to Bear Arms.
-
-
- Right to Bear Arms Origins
-
- http://www.wecs.com/moore.htm
|