Progressive?

Are we really a “progressive, enlightened society” if we’re becoming more violent, divisive, and lawless?

 

As a person matures, we expect greater measures of peacemaking, selflessness, and prudence. What does it mean when our heroes and leaders act like toddlers and are celebrated for doing so?

 

What have we become when we tolerate the use of guns as gavels and the abuse of both? Have we progressed so far past our nation’s founding that “liberty and justice for all” is an antiquated ideal?

 

See, neither liberalism nor conservatism can address our problems as a people. Empires routinely rise and fall, and they do so from within.

Sin can’t be defeated on our terms.

Of Lead and Lies

State of the Union Address, source: http://goo.gl/r7zs6

“Police chiefs are asking our help to get weapons of war and massive magazines off the streets because they are tired of being outgunned.” – Barack Obama

I have several responses to this statement from President Obama’s latest (2013) State of the Union Address. We’re going to assume (and I think safely) that he is referring to his proposed gun control measures, including a new “assault weapons” ban on semi-automatic rifles with certain cosmetic features and “high-capacity” magazines.

First, I’d hardly call a 10-round clip “massive”, and how many people use semi-automatic rifles in combat? If they did, they’d be outgunned for sure.

More importantly, HOW can police forces be outgunned by legally-owned semi-automatic rifles like the media-demonized AR-15 when they have fully-automatic M4s and M16s – not to mention sniper rifles and countless other SWAT equipment?! Which police chiefs are we talking about? Can we get some quotes from them?

That statement he made is dead wrong, and he is smart enough to know it. Furthermore, we’ve already had an assault weapons ban, and it did not demonstrate any effect on gun violence. Our own government said so. Some studies show that gun violence and police causalities actually increased during the ban (just Google it; they’re everywhere).

So why did he say it? It’s my opinion that this administration is blatantly capitalizing on mass ignorance and propaganda (using dead kids and seldom-used legal weapons) to further their agenda. Why?

The more I think about it, the more it frustrates me. IF the police chiefs are a) real and b) actually talking about illegal weapons, then 1) another ban on legal weapons will do nothing to affect that problem (or any problem), 2) It is VERY dishonest and dishonorable for him to use that quote to promote such a ban, and 3) he is actually ignoring their request by aiming at the wrong target.

If they are a) real and b) in fact talking about semi-automatic rifles (as is implied), then we need to have it explained to us how they are being outgunned by legally-owned inferior defense weapons and how that is a big enough problem for federal-level concern, given that such weapons are only used in 2% of armed crimes. Because, if true, that would be a problem that also needs to be addressed. That would mean our police forces are weak and dramatically unequipped to police or defend us.

Everybody supports more public safety and less gun violence. So why not make rational, logical, truthful statements and look for a solution that works?

I’m trying to steer clear of paranoia, but there are few explanations left for this massive campaign of lies besides the speculation that “they are planning something”. Draw your own conclusions.

Please, don’t be among the easily-manipulated. Educate yourself.