Political Terrorism vs the NRAPosted by Guest Post on April 29, 2013
In order to read the world news and professional commentary in the local paper, I cannot help but peruse the letters of the local small thinkers who have not the slightest clue about the root of freedom in this country. And they couple that complete unawareness of history with their complete willingness to tear the 2nd Amendment away from the Constitution in the name of being a safer and more secure United States.
Here are some quotes from such dizzy writers in just one day’s issue this past week. A purported Ph.D (meaning anybody can apparently get one) proposed in his letter that the National Rifle Association be declared a terrorist organization, adding, “The NRA aids, abets and enables terrorism . . . encourages and empowers the sale and proliferation of terrorist weaponry.”
He further proposed that “the Department of Justice pursue the prosecution of the NRA and its leadership to the full extent of the law under appropriate acts regarding terrorist organizations” and that elected officials who vote anything that hints of pro-NRA be declared “accessories to terrorism, impeached and banned from further public office.” (I assume the absence of Freedom of Speech was the obvious prerequisite for this former student of higher learning).
Well, why not? The good doctor certainly has the right Attorney General for it. And NRA members, sir? I suppose they had best denounce their association for fear of becoming the new political prisoners destined for Obama-nation concentration camps.
After gritting my teeth through that one, there was the letter from Doug the roach. With great authority and no factual basis, his message was simply “Repeal the 2nd Amendment” as it is “no longer applicable to present day society . . . let’s make our country more safe.”
Factually speaking (if I dare), the Commander of Japan’s Pacific fleet stated long ago that the United States had no fear of his forces ever invading the West Coast after routing our Navy at Pearl Harbor. The reason? There would be “a gun behind every blade of grass” on mainland USA.
And that is the very essence of the 2nd Amendment – keeping our country safe from enemies foreign and domestic. And while there existed after December 7, 1941, the understandable paranoia of such a follow-up offensive, even our most treacherous enemy respected the potential militia that lay in wait from within.
That means nothing in the progressive interpretation of American history, and our nation now invites its enemies into our very midst with countless student visas to virtually any Arab candidate, nationalities that have always been the face of terror around the world since Oklahoma City. And a monumentally inane and unqualified Secretary of Homeland Defense all but guarantees a porous national border and easy passage for members of drug cartels, other violent criminals, and countless dregs who have no place to go once across the US/Mexican border.
But liberals do not consider mid-east terrorists and sadistic cartel members the enemy of the State. That is reserved for the National Rifle Association, its law-abiding members, and the predominantly Republican portion of politicians who respect and cherish Constitutional principle – plus the irrefutable fact that adherence to the Founders’ prescription for this society is tried and true and has timelessly gotten it right.
Some on the left, in a more civil tone, (hey, it can happen) lament that the NRA went from a service organization that was once all about gun and hunting safety to a monster special interest hellbent on filling the streets with unchecked firepower. One letter writer reflected on his childhood in the 1950s, near New York City, when his high school had junior and senior Rod and Gun Clubs, and “we all brought our guns to school” to be checked for safety by NRA personnel who were “always available for those club meetings”. Then he regrets some point in time when the NRA abandoned its safety mission to become the left’s political adversary.
Wait a minute! When “we all brought our guns to school”, near none other than New York City? That once home of the Bloomberg 16-ounce maximum soft drink New York City? And he makes the argument that the NRA changed? This guy, innocently and unwittingly, just made the best argument he possibly could for conservative gun owners across the land.
The role of the NRA, as a lobbying giant, is a natural counter to the hate rhetoric and blame put on it and its membership after every mass assault on human life, a phenomenon that comes in knee jerk fashion from leftist groups who loathe guns in general and gun owners in particular. The NRA has never turned away from its staunch support of gun and hunting safety, nor its continued work towards conservation. Throw in its unalterable campaign for maximum prosecution and punishment for any and all who commit any crime whatsoever with a firearm, and you have a correct perception of the organization.
True, aggressive lobbying is a newer hat for the NRA, but I know of no other Amendment where a nation’s certain citizens must contribute regularly to hold on to what should be left alone as a Right of the people. But in reality, it has become necessary, so as to preserve for free Americans the unalienable right to protect and defend themselves against everything from criminal aggression, which liberals never acknowledge, to socialist tyranny, which they forever embrace.
Latest posts by Guest Post (see all)
- I’m Young, African American, Female and … Republican! - February 12, 2014
- Political Terrorism vs the NRA - April 29, 2013