By Nicholas Stix
I don’t know what I’d do, if I were one of those parents, or family of any of the murdered teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School. There’s not even the consolation of killing the shooter, because he committed suicide. At least no taxpayers will have to pay millions of dollars for his room and board.
But as Rahm Emanuel says, every crisis is an opportunity, and the gun grabbers, starting with the dictator calling himself “Barack Obama” and New York King Michael Bloomberg, and Senator Chuck Schumer have begun seeking to use those dead children for political gain.
Although as my 12-year-old always reminds me, “There is no such thing as an assault rifle!,” mass murderer Adam Lanza used a Bushmaster .223 M4 rifle, which the media and the Democratic Party have re-defined as an assault rifle, but he did most of his damage with .22 caliber Sig Sauer and Glock pistols.
Thus, not only would the totalitarians have to violate the Second Amendment, but they would have to ban, in effect, every ordinary sort of weapon, along with those they have re-defined. Of course, that’s what they’ve been trying to do for generations, where law-abiding whites are concerned.
As I see it, there are four main sets of issues here:
Policies Towards the Criminally Insane/De-institutionalization
Gun-Free Zones
Moral Meltdown
What the Confiscation of Legal Guns Would Entail
Policies Towards the Criminally Insane/De-Institutionalization
Thousands of known, violent lunatics roam our streets. Some are schizophrenic; others are not. Their propagandists, including some judges like Nicholas Garaufis, who should be locked up, say these people are not a danger to themselves or others. I don’t give a fig if they are a danger to themselves! But they are murders waiting to happen. And they do happen.
Andrew Goldstein pushed Kendra Webdale to her death, in the path of a subway train.
Naeem Davis did likewise to Ki-Suk Han.
Lucious Smith stabbed Stephanie Ross to death.
Maurice Clemmons murdered four white police officers.
This sort of thing happens all the time, murders committed by people who were well known to the authorities, who had often received many complaints about their behavior, including violence and death threats, while doing little or nothing.
Up until about 40 years ago, such individuals were kept away from the public in institutions, whether prisons or psycho wards. Then some brilliant judges got the idea to integrate the maniacs into society, and ordered them “de-institutionalized.”
Either Larry Auster or one of his readers argued that it will likely come out that Adam Lanza was known to be deranged.
Lanza may only have been 20, but he was surely known to the authorities, including at the elementary school where his mother taught, and where he committed all but one of his murders.
That would explain why he took his brother Ryan’s identification. Ryan was known to be the good brother.
And indeed, those who knew Adam Lanza have said that he had always been crazy, and that they weren’t surprised that he had become a murderer. His mother, poor woman, had reportedly given up teaching to devote herself full-time to his care.
However, we still don't know if Lanza had done enough to justify confining him, even under a sane insanity policy.
Gun-Free Zones
While Adam Lanza may have identified Sandy Hook Elementary with his mother, I believe he chose it for his carnage because he knew it was a gun-free zone. There was no one in a position to stop him.
Many neighborhoods around schools have been turned into “gun-free zones” by posturing politicians, at the behest of sanctimonious, brain-dead liberals. Making a neighborhood a “gun-free zone” just announces to criminals that it is a felon’s paradise of helpless prey.
Moral Meltdown
Auster also argued that the elites constantly destroy moral norms and celebrate evil, and then are shocked when someone forsakes all moral norms and commits evil acts.
"For they sow the wind, and they reap the whirlwind."
What the Confiscation of Legal Guns Would Entail
The dictator calling himself “Barack Obama,“ et al., seek to confiscate all guns presently owned by ordinary, law-abiding, white citizens. Not all guns. The rich, famous, and influential will still have their guns and their gunsels. “Obama,” Bloomberg, and Schumer will still have their taxpayer-financed, heavily-armed bodyguards for the rest of their lives. Communist New York Times publisher Arthur “Pinch” Sulzberger Jr. will still have the gun he carries everywhere in New York. But you and I will be lose our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. (Actually, I have already lost said right, due to New York State’s almost 100-year-old, unconstitutional Sullivan Act.)
But criminals will always have guns. As the saying goes, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.”
Gun-grabbers like “Obama” know that black and brown criminals will laugh at gun seizure laws, but then, he supports such criminals.
What states and cities have the most murders from guns? The ones with the most stringent gun control laws.
The Boss’ nation of birth, Trinidad, has universal gun control, yet the bad guys have all the guns they want.
And police, who in the age of diversity, are themselves increasingly morally unfit to wear the badge, will also have guns.
That leaves the good people walking around with targets on their backs.
I want to also note the gratuitous viciousness the media have shown. They have gone out of their way to show the exact address where Ryan Lanza lives, name the killer’s stepmother, and report on the city where his father and stepmother live, and where his brother, father, and stepmother work. This has clearly been done with the single purpose of endangering people who have done nothing wrong. If these people had been gun-grabbers, the media would never have done this.
There are issues we can rationally discuss and make policy over, and then we come to the end of reason. Robbing law-abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights will not make America safer, and those seeking to exploit the Newtown dead do not seek to make her safer. We must not let staged hysteria, including “Barack Obama’s” tears, bamboozle us into an irrational, unsafe, not to mention unconstitutional policy.
Missed your writings. Glad you survived.
ReplyDeleteOMG you're insane
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely most sensible thing I've seen on the subject so far. Quoted, linked, and commented here:
ReplyDeletehttp://ex-army.blogspot.com/2012/12/newtown-massacre-four-issues-not-one.html
Emanuel is a putz. Chicago is one of the most violent cities in this hemisphere. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-shootings-violence-december-14-december-15-20121214,0,912168.story
ReplyDeleteAnd gun control?
Emanuel has dual citizenship with Israel. Israel has no gun control. So, if it's good enough for Israel, then why not here?
The Oregon shooting has been displaced by the Connecticut shooting, understandable to the greater loss of life but I suspect there is more at work. Note the shooters ethnicity is indeterminate but could be latino, black, white mix or possibly just the first two. I have the physical newspaper photo and his dark skin and non white features are even more striking than the one the web. The initial photo of the shooter, on local newspapers, showed him to have white skin, which is absurd when looking at this photo. This suggests doctoring to make him appear to have lighter skin, a game the media has played before with non white criminals.
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me of the recent chicken factory mass shooting with a black perp. You had to search to find a photo of the shooter, something common with black shooters but never with white shooters. This chicken factory shooter received brief token mention and was quickly displaced by the sentencing of Jared Loughner a "white" shooter with a nice shaved head and white supremist look that got plastered on the front pages. I was watching the news and noticed this, of course it's a pattern I've seen before, the media is reluctant to mention race when killers are black but never hesitate to trumpet "WHITE" when they are white. Anyone who half pays attention to the media is aware of this bias.
I know there are those who would say I'm manipulating a tragedy to promote a racial agenda, for those I will say this:
Why is it OK for media representatives to declare mass/serial killers are usually always "white males" as if it's not an issue with blacks. God forbid they ever mention blacks are actually overrepresented in relation to the population percentage in the are of serial/mass killing. It's OK for the media/entertainment complex to present whites as exclusively being serial/mass killers and pretend that blacks don't commit these crimes but no one will criticize them yet someone who call them on it is considered insensitive or "having a racist agenda". Give me a break.
Also, pretending serial/mass killers are only white allows blacks and white society in general to pretend it's not an issue in the black community (kind of like they do with incest) so nothing needs to be addressed. This allows murderers to develop and operate under the radar and successfully commit more crimes, thereby as Nicholas Stix often reminds us: "endangering public safety". So to all you hypocrites who are bristling with indignation reading this: Fuck You. Jerry
http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/index.ssf/2012/12/clackamas_town_center_shooting_50.html
"I want to also note the gratuitous viciousness the media have shown. They have gone out of their way to show the exact address where Ryan Lanza lives, name the killer’s stepmother, and report on the city where his father and stepmother live, and where his brother, father, and stepmother work."
ReplyDeleteYes, and when the perpetrator is non-White the media will not ever mention the race of the perpetrator much less their address.
Remember the My-T-Fine Car Wash murders in Texas?
ReplyDeleteWhat, you don't?
The perp was black.
All the victims were white and brown. http://www.murderpedia.org/male.H/h/harris-robert-wayne.htm
Great article as always.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I have seen on CNN (sorry, I watch them to keep on eye on the Liberal agenda) they are now saying every single death was caused by the Bushmaster. I'm not sure if I believe them or not, but now there is a lot of talk about banning this type of weapon (as there always is after this sort of incident)
Banning guns will do nothing and only serves criminals because a ban won't stop them from gaining possession of them. Think about this: "Wow, so making assault rifles illegal will get rid of them? We should also make Meth and Cocaine illegal"-In other words, criminals will always have access to illegal weaponry.
I have seen a lot of disturbing patterns and trends designed to ultimately remove rights from citizens while making it appear it is what the people want.
1.Banning guns:The media plays up stories involving mass shootings often showing the story 24/7. They rarely if ever show stories where guns have prevented a crime. Result: People become scared and want more gun control. Anyone advocating the right to bear arms is instantly demonized and told 'if you support guns, then you support things like mass shootings of children'.
2.Diversity: Your favorite subject. The media sensationalizes the rare white on black crimes and rarely reports the huge number of black on white crimes. Result: Blacks look like victims of the white man and whites appear as aggressors who prey on blacks for no reason. Anyone pointing this out is instantly called a racist which, as we know, can make you lose friends faster than anything else I'm aware of and can even end careers.
3. Control of internet: Hysteria over bullying has gone out of control. The word 'bully' itself has now lost any real meaning much as the word 'racist' has. Now, leaving a negative comment on someone's post on certain popular websites is considered bullying and there have actually been arrests made for nothing more than a well thought-out negative comment on someone's post. This is especially true if you try to give facts to protected groups. (blacks, gays, jews, women, etc)
Result: people are afraid to leave comments containing anything negative anywhere on the internet. The internet becomes a bunch of Liberal diversity nuts who can spout their non sense without challenge, thus making it appear they are right.
There's much more, but I'm sure i'm reaching my character limit. So, again, glad you are back and I love all your articles.