Why We Will Always Need To Own Guns

From: thefederalist.com,  by John Donovan,  on Jun 24, 2016,  see the article HERE.

1911 and Constitution

Behind the surface of America’s ‘gun culture’ exists a grim and simple truth: There is no protector; there is no guardian; there is no defender except oneself.

With the ever-increasing hysteria and the tone of accusation surrounding almost every aspect of public discourse, it seems crucial that we Americans begin to try to understand each other rather than divide ourselves even further.

With that in mind, one of the more polarizing issues occupying public attention of late has been the role of weapons in civilians’ hands, and whether this has become anachronistic in light of horrific events such as we have seen in Orlando and San Bernardino. There is no shortage of disagreement on the matter, and each side seems perfectly willing to engage in the worst kind of vitriolic rhetoric in defense of their viewpoint.

This state of affairs is counter-productive. Therefore, here I will seek to help those with viewpoints opposite my own understand why I believe what I do.

Why People Own Weapons

To start, I believe in the right of citizens to be armed. I own what others in this country call “weapons of war,” and to me this is the only appropriate way of things. I am not a hunter, and I cannot claim to have ever used my weapons to end the life of any living creature. I enjoy the shooting sports, but that is not the reason I own weaponry. These are not devices of recreation, useful as they may be for that purpose. They are weapons, and whatever else we may say about them, we all know that to be the case.

Additionally, it is true that these weapons are “weapons of war,” as many are so fond of pointing out. Historically, this title places them in the same category as bolt-action rifles, crossbows, swords, and rocks. Every weapon is a “weapon of war,” and we own them for a reason.

In all of human society, and equally if not more so in the West, men have always had a powerful attachment to weapons. Weapons are a near-sacred aspect of the Western tradition, depicted in our art and enshrined in our stories. Many men in modern society know this without ever bothering to ask why. It’s a truth as clear and fundamental as any other: free men own weapons, slaves do not. They are instruments of life more than of death, the method by which we fulfill our role as shepherds and caretakers, and our birthright as Westerners.

Many seek to exploit this connection between masculinity and weapons, mischaracterizing it as some Freudian attempt at “feeling like a man.” In truth, it is the opposite: We are men, and therefore we own weapons. A man does not need weapons to “feel like a man.” Rather, he understands his role as a defender of himself and those around him, and takes measures to ensure that role is fulfilled. Many women understand this just as clearly, but limited as I am, I feel it only appropriate that I allow them to speak for themselves on this matter if they choose.

Behind the surface of America’s “gun culture” exists a grim and simple truth: There is no protector; there is no guardian; there is no defender except oneself. We hide ourselves from this truth, we don’t talk about it. We have faith in our military and police, and rightly so: They are men and women of honor, who sacrifice far more than we to fulfill the role of protector. But they are few, and there are wolves among us. It is up to each individual to ensure that he or she is prepared to meet whatever threat, foreign or domestic, and to do so with appropriate force.

The Need for Self-Defense Will Never Die

Many attempt to delude themselves, suggesting that the right to bear arms is a relic of another time. They insist we have changed, and have made progress enough to toss aside those old principles from another era. There is but one question to ask in response: In light of the events in Orlando, Newtown, and elsewhere, how much can we truly claim to have changed? These acts were as savage and evil as any in our history. Our protectors, valiant as they are, cannot prevent these acts of brutality until it is already too late. No law or institution has done anything to stop the wolves from preying on us, as is clearly demonstrated by the attacks in Paris and Brussels. The grim, horrifying truth remains unchanged: We, each of us, are our only protectors.

That is why we arm ourselves. We are charged with defending ourselves, our families, our communities, and our nation. The vast might of our military and the commendable efforts of our police do nothing to diminish that truth. We are the men of the West. Regardless of race, religion, or sexual preference, our lives, liberty, and principles exist only insofar as we are willing to take up arms to protect them.

All through history, nations have fallen. No empire has ever withstood the march of history, and likewise our own will fail. We are far too young a nation to believe ourselves untouchable, and only through arrogance and naivety do we convince ourselves of our most dangerous folly: “It can’t happen to me.”

The people of the West desperately need a reality check. We are so comfortable, so happy, and so ignorant of our own good fortune that we begin to believe humanity has changed. But more and more it becomes clear that this belief is unfounded, put to lie by the violence visited upon innocents across our nation. The wolves are among us once more, and no law will protect you. You are responsible for yourself.

~~~~~~~~~~

Every time I see a new push for “gun control” by the leftists, I have to wonder why they can’t understand the simple notion that each of us is ultimately responsible for our own and our families well-being which includes personal safety. The law enforcement agencies (God love ’em) can’t be everywhere at the same time and studies show that an average police response time is about 11 minutes. So, it should follow that if one is unfortunate enough to be the victim of a mugging, car-jacking, or home invasion, you can expect that the perp will have somewhere around 11 minutes to do with you what he (or she) will.

If you’re lucky, the perp will only take property, which the gun control crowd is fond of saying “can be replaced,” but that may not be the case if the stolen property are family treasures or you can’t immediately replace the automobile that was car-jacked – it may not be as simple as “just replace it.” Not to mention the loss of assets you worked hard to acquire and the cost of replacing them.

And worse, consider that the perp may be a child molester or a rapist whose primary purpose for the home invasion was sexual and your wife or daughter was the target. Imagine the post-incident regret that you would feel if you hadn’t done more to safeguard your family. And we can’t simply ignore that an incident could result in death or serious injury, how would that make you feel?

We, who believe in the responsible ownership and use of guns, recognize that being armed can’t guarantee that no harm will befall us or our family, it still can happen, but we are better prepared to repel a criminal who is trying to do us harm than if we’re unarmed. And we are not trying to mandate that everyone be armed – that’s a personal preference – but, the gun control crowd is not willing to give us the same consideration, they want to disarm us. If they had their way, we would be disarmed and just as vulnerable as they are – but not by choice.

A gun can be a “killing machine,” but it can also be a “saving machine.” If you’re afraid of guns, don’t buy one – that’s pretty simple. But if you want to take personal responsibility for your own safety and that of your family, buy a gun, learn how to handle it safely, and commit to the seriousness of owning and using a firearm. You just might be glad that you did.

Garnet92.

 



Categories: General

Tags: ,

11 replies

  1. While the essay above is well-written and I have no argument with it, for me it always comes down to one familiar, irrefutable sentence, “If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.” The gun control crowd has no rebuttal to that simple fact because there isn’t one.

    The Founders understood that there are certain basic rights that must be declared and protected, and one of those is the right to defend oneself. That’s only possible by having access to weapons that can potentially make us as formidable as our attackers. It is imperative that we never back down on it.

    Like

  2. The liberals casually say ‘things can be replaced’. While that is true for some things, it’s not true for all things, and they don’t mention the violated feeling that’s in your head and in the pit of your stomach once you’ve had a break-in. For a while you lay awake at night wondering if they’re going to come back…will it happen while I or we are here this time…are they watching us to learn our routine?? It ‘s about much more than replacing mere things, but the libs will never acknowledge that in their efforts to disarm us.

    As with every individual, I am responsible for myself. My husband, brother, father, whatever male figure can’t always be here 24/7, so I have to be as responsible for my safety, and that of my property, as they would be.

    Although the libs will never get it, or at least never admit it, the 2A is timeless and that was by design. The reason our type of government is unique is due to their foresight, otherwise, they could have based it on the government of any other country. But they didn’t.

    Like

  3. I began to CC 20 years ago due to our cash business. I handled a lot of cash. But we both have kept our permits up to date and have purchased many more weapons and ammunition. We take our responsibility for our selves seriously.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I’ve had one for about the same length of time (since 1996 when George Bush took over as Governor) and just sent in my renewal. I started by carrying only occasionally, gradually increasing the frequency until a couple of years ago when I began daily carry anytime I’m off of my own property. I never leave home without my “little friend.”

      Liked by 1 person

      • Garnet, a few years ago I was startled by 2 men in my driveway (a long driveway). They had pulled their pick up truck all the way to my garage door. I walked out and they were setting up some kind of equipment, ON MY PROPERTY WITHOUT MY CONSENT. I asked what they were doing here. They said they worked for the mining company and were recording the seismic waves of the charges they were setting off.

        I told them they had no right on my property without checking with me first. Told them I could have shot them for doing what they did. (I was here alone with my 93 year old mom-we are WAAAYYYY out in the country. Can’t see another house.) I started wearing my weapon around the house when I was alone and at other times then.
        Paranoid? nah-just realistic.

        Liked by 1 person

      • As the old saying goes, “better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.” That’s my philosophy.

        Like

  4. One “common sense” argument proffered by anti-gun zealots, determined to undermine our God given right to self-defense, really demonstrates how narrow their minds are.
    They claim the founders could not have foreseen development of these “weapons of war” (aka modern sporting rifles like the AR-15), so those firearms are not protected under the Second Amendment.
    While that may or may not be true (although they were some pretty sharp dudes and dudettes), they were certainly visionary enough to understand human nature. They knew, no matter what technological advances followed their times, evil people with bad intentions would always be around to prey on the defenseless.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Saltwater, notice the Constitution never mentions ‘muskits’!

      Like

      • Even if it did, the grabbers would still be afoul of logic. One of the characteristics they claim turns a rifle into an “assault weapon” is having a way to affix a bayonet — something common to nearly every “non-assault” musket possessed at the time.

        Liked by 1 person

    • I concur that the founders were pretty sharp dudes and dudettes – they were smart enough to stay away from being too specific which would have dated so many of the Amendments, not the least of which would have been the 2nd.

      Even the best of them couldn’t have foreseen an easily concealable handgun capable of firing 15 (or more) rounds in quick succession without reloading. If they HAD incorporated only the “state of the art” concepts of the day, the 2nd would have become obsolete and useless by the late 1800’s.

      Like

      • Thankfully they were too smart for that trap, or the advent of rifled and breech-loading long guns would have doomed 2A, and our independence, in their infancy.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: