Totalitarianism in Plain Sight
A tragedy has once again rocked our nation. A mad man walked
into an elementary school and killed nearly 30 people including a class of
first graders; a horror too unbearable to contemplate. Not one to miss a good
tragedy, our current government is using this tragedy to push political agendas,
none of which deal with the real problem.
The solution proposed by the Obama administration is to get
tighter gun control laws. Because one mad man used guns in a violent way, the
proposed solution is to restrict the freedom of every single law-abiding
It is absurd to think this will prevent school shootings in
the future. Laws on pieces of paper will not stop mad men. Violent psychopaths
do not care about laws; murder is also illegal. Further, this
"solution" cannot and will not end here. It first of all won't work.
In response, those who favor controlling all Americans as a solution to somehow
eradicating the crime of a few will conclude that firearms need to be better
tracked. Laws will be proposed to register firearms. When it becomes clear that
criminals don't buy firearms legally, more visibility will be requested.
Cameras will be proposed to watch what everyone does at all times. This is the logical
course for those who propose such totalitarian solutions, i.e., having total
control over the lives of every citizen.
The proposed gun control will no doubt focus on
"powerful" firearms. Limiting "powerful"
firearms would not have prevented this tragedy. Good or evil behavior remains
the province of humans, not inanimate objects. A better solution is to focus on
the ill behavior of this mad man. This could take many forms, such as
cultivating a stronger, more life-affirming morality or a better ability to
deal with mental illness. However, no matter how much awareness is brought to
mental illness or how well values are taught, there will still be mad men. Ill,
violent behavior can be minimized; it cannot be eradicated. Security will
always be important. Everyone, including schools, must be security conscious.
Laws don't stop violent criminals; confrontation with deadly weapons in the
hands of good men does. My husband and I started the facebook group Protect Our Children; Secure Our Schools
to bring awareness to the importance of security at schools.
These mass shootings are a product
of bad government. Before the Gun Free School Zone Act, originally enacted in
1990, there were only 7 school shootings in 214 years. Since then, there have
75. National leaders need to admit: The Gun Free School Zone Act has failed.
These mass shootings continue to be at places that are defenseless, with mad
men targeting the most vulnerable of society, who by law are forbidden
protection. (The original Gun Free School Zone Act prohibited all firearms. It
was deemed by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. Bill Clinton signed it
back into law with some minor word changes which make firearms
"allowed" but with such heavy restrictions that effectively they are forbidden.)
A "gun free" zone screams "sitting duck." These mad men
seek infamy, and they are doing it by hitting easy targets where they can get
impressive body counts. For those who propose tighter gun control: What tighter
control can there be than "no guns allowed"?
I do not buy that Clinton, Obama,
Bloomberg, et al care about the security of school children. They know
how important armed security is—they rely on it daily themselves. I do not
think they orchestrate mass shootings but they let the monster loose and deny
heroes—the countless number of people who would gladly risk their lives
engaging a mad man shooter for themselves and their loved ones—the ability to
stop the monster. It is a recipe for a
tragedy that they can politically cash in on. Their anti-freedom policies continue
to spawn more and more anti-freedom policies, at the expense of children.
This is how our modern
government works: cause trouble, create a tragedy, then blame private
individuals. Government created a housing bubble, which burst around 2007, and
promptly blamed greedy bankers. Government ordered the military to stand down
in Benghazi and an ambassador was killed, and they blamed a private film on
Islam. Now, after denying schools the ability to secure themselves and mass
shootings continue to occur, they blame gun ownership. It is tyranny in plain
sight, which they are using to further their totalitarian policies. There is no
need to concoct conspiracy theories; what is visible is atrocious enough. They
clearly do not care about the suffering they cause; they subscribe to the
ideology of Lenin that a few eggs need cracked to make an omelet.
The real problem here is the
lack of security at schools. The politics that revolve around increasing the
security at our schools is positively maddening. Sure, if schools were private,
where they were allowed to choose the method to secure themselves, this would
not have to be a national debate. Parents and school staff would only have to
petition the business owners of their school to increase security. But this is
not the reality of our schools; most schools are public and this will not
likely change. So now it has to be a national debate. You have big-government
socialists who, wanting the government pot of money for their own causes, will
never agree to paying for security at schools. You have (some) libertarians who,
opposed to government spending at all, will oppose it on principle. Everyone
has their own agenda, meanwhile, school children remain unprotected. And
government continues to use these tragedies to further socialist agendas.
Government's one and only job is
to secure citizens. The solution to mass shootings is not gun control but to
secure schools. The solution is two-fold: let schools carry firearms and
provide funding for real security departments at schools. Compared to the cost
of social security, war efforts, or even welfare, the cost of adding 1 or 2
personnel at each school to have a security department is negligible. It is not
a "massive government program." It is pocket change.
This solution deals with the
actual problem: something our current politicians have no interest in doing.
December 22, 2012