barack obama, Benjamin Franklin, Bill of Rights, Bruen, Constitution, CRT, D/S/Cs, Declaration of Independence, Defund the police, Heller, illegal immigrants, joe biden, John Adams, Kamala Harris, McDonald, military recruiting failure, police response times, Ronald Reagan, second amendment, Social justice, Supreme Court, Thomas Jefferson
I last updated this series of articles in late December of 2021, and will continue to update it yearly. America has long been embroiled in a culture war. In the last few years, Democrats/Socialists/Communists—that party is mostly the latter two, who rule it and determine its direction—have entirely ceased pretending they are in a culture war. Now, they blatantly state their ultimate, totalitarian intentions, shouting their policies from the rooftops as though they are revealed, self-evident truth. They mean to win, to retain and build power for all time. As they gained power in 2020, they have demonstrated exactly how they plan to rule, and Americans, even some left of center, are worried. Whether they have suddenly been smacked in the face with reality—the prototypical leftist post-mugging—or it’s a subconscious survival instinct, even D/S/s have continued to buy guns at a previously unimaginable pace:
‘Background checks for firearm purchases were already trending to make 2022 the third strongest year on record, coming off of the outsized years of 2020 and 2021,’ explained Joe Bartozzi, NSSF president and CEO. ‘These figures tell us that there is a continued strong appetite for lawful firearm ownership by law-abiding Americans and that firearm manufacturers across the country continue to deliver the quality firearms our customers have come to expect.’
Perhaps the American tendency to spite government mandates is also involved. Public health officials, who have all but thrown away any credibility they once had, would put everyone back in masks and lockdowns if they could. Recent Twitter revelations (enter “twitter tells the truth” in the SMM home page search bar to find every SMM article on the topic) have all but completely erased public respect for the FBI and other government agencies. A Republican “red wave” did not fully materialize at the 2022 mid term elections, but Republicans did take the House of Representatives, though few expect them to do much of substance with it.
Americans have also watched in growing alarm as D/S/Cs have stripped the upper ranks of our military of patriots and professional, capable warriors, leaving only social justice warriors. This focus on ideology rather than war fighting has badly damaged military recruiting. American know a military well versed in Critical Race Theory, self-loathing and LGBTQWERTY orthodoxy is dangerous, but not to America’s enemies.
And therein lies the greatest dawning realization. America’s self-imagined elite hate America and Americans and want every American to do the same in their embrace of an enlightened socialism/globalism. Believing American citizenship to be of no value, and realizing that Americans will stubbornly refuse to vote for the right—left—candidates, they seek to abolish American citizens and import another they believe will be more tractable: the flood of illegal immigrants.
The overt, arrogant and angry determination of 2020 D/S/C presidential candidates to confiscate guns drove a run on gun stores, as has D/S/C support for utter lawlessness in many American cities run by D/S/C politicians. So too has the D/S/C driven “defund the police” movement, which is far from running its course, though some politicians, fearful of being run out of office, are sort of admitting the police might be necessary. Other are claiming they never defunded the police; it was all those evil Normal Americans and Republicans! Unfortunately, they’ve done so much damage to law enforcement, professional officers want nothing to do with their cities and states. As this is written, guns and ammunition, once scarce, are now more widely available, and costs, particularly for ammunition, have substantially declined.
With that as background, it’s once again time to revise this series. I’ll post these updated articles—a total of 14 last time; we’ll see what happens this time–in sequence every Tuesday for the foreseeable future.
Times have changed, and not for the better. While President Trump made significant strides against constant opposition, the Biden meat puppet/mummy administration has done its best to obliterate every gain Mr. Trump made for the American people. Illegal immigration, and the crime it enables, is once again a significant danger. The daily influx of illegal immigrants, criminals, murderous gangsters, human traffickers and terrorists from around the world is overwhelming our southern border. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have thrown open our borders, emasculated our immigration enforcement agencies, delivered free health care for illegal immigrants, imported tens of thousands of unvetted Afghans, continue to fly tens of thousands of illegals around the nation in the dark of night, and D/S/C ruled states and cities continue to give them driver’s licenses and even the vote. They want illegal immigration, which provides present and future Democrat voters—whether those votes are legal no longer matters–and their reflexive hatred of normal Americans has so deranged them they are harming America and Americans out of spite. D/S/Cs claim government will provide for all, yet they care nothing for individuals, particularly Normal Americans. In every way that matters, our personal safety is our responsibility; we’re on our own, and always have been.
Barack Obama once held the undisputed title of best firearm salesman in history. The age of Obama provoked an unprecedented increase in the sales of firearms and ammunition by Americans not previously noted as likely gun owners. The Biden Administration , arguably, is hot on the heels of overtaking Obama’s record, if it has not already taken the prize.
When Americans can no longer trust their government, they realize they have to trust themselves. The weaponization of the Department of Justice, the FBI, our intelligence apparatus, and the exposure of the Deep State and rampant election fraud in the 2020 and 2022 elections are only a few of the scandals that have convinced normal Americans Ronald Reagan was right: government is not the solution; government is the problem, and such a government cannot be trusted. The government sponsored Marxist cancel culture, CRT, Antifa, BLM, trans lunacy, pedophilia, all of it, goes even deeper and Americans are initially responding by arming themselves, as prelude to more potentially serious future responses.
Some D/S/Cs have begun to understand the government doesn’t actually want to provide for all their needs, and that even if it did, it couldn’t. Even though only a short time ago they demonized guns and their owners, they have begun to understand government’s cynically failed promises extend to refusing to protect their lives, and they too, for the first time in their lives, have begun buying, and enjoying, guns.
Across the country, but largely in D/S/C controlled cities, underfunded, understaffed police agencies have admitted they can’t even respond to all their 911 calls. Some police executives have actually told the public to arm themselves because they can no longer depend on the police.
Obviously, Americans need to think seriously about life and death issues. The issues one must consider with care are summed up by two questions:
(1) Does evil exist?
(2) What must be the honorable man’s—and woman’s—response to evil?
Those that deny the existence of evil can stop reading at the end of this sentence, and hope–-they’re likely not comfortable with or practiced at prayer–-they’re right. Those that admit to at least the possibility evil exists, should read on.
Before we get to my wretched scribblings, however, it would be worthwhile to read three related articles, two relatively recent, one now more than 20 years old. My friend and fellow blogger Andrea Widberg has written two articles on the subject of evil and how rational, moral people should respond to it. The first is here and the second, here. In 1993, Jeffrey R. Snyder wrote a seminal article titled A Nation of Cowards, in which he explored issues of good and evil and provided sound logic on the moral man’s response to evil, which unquestionably exists. Unlike the shrill whining of intellectual and moral lightweights like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Kamala Harris—who cannot reliably pronounce her first name–Gropin’ Joe Biden—who is not sure who or where he is–Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Merrick Garland and many more–-when they’re not fanning the flames of racial grievance and resentment, lying to and loathing the American people, violating the Constitution or persecuting political enemies–-it is one of those bits of reasoning with which all well-read people should be familiar.
I would hope you might feel similarly disposed to my writings when you’ve taken the time to consider them.
This is the first in a series of articles exploring, in depth, the issues revolving around gun ownership. Whether you have never considered owning a gun, are thinking about it, or own all you need but not as many as you would like, this series may provide some ideas, and perhaps provide information useful in discussing the issue.
THE PHILOSOPHY OF GUN OWNERSHIP
Do human beings have an unalienable right to self-defense? If your reflexive answer is: “absolutely not,” now would be a good time to be sure you have 911 on your speed dial. However, tragically, that will be cold comfort, as this series will reveal. Truisms are true for good reason, and few are more revealing of reality than this:
When seconds count, the police are minutes away.
Consider these police response times from the Bureau of Justice Statistics:
Keep in mind these statistics are derived from self-reporting by law enforcement agencies. Many do not report this information, and many, particularly D/S/C ruled cities, can’t be trusted to provide accurate information. The reality of even this table is surely worse than reported. Detroit, for example, has for years had a 58 minute 911 call response time, when they respond at all. In many cities, the same holds true; many 911 calls go unanswered.
This is the nature of police emergency response in much of the United States. In some places it’s a simple matter of the distances common in rural America. In others it’s a matter of lack of money and manpower. In others crime is so rampant, response to even true emergencies is rationed, and in others, incompetence plays a role. In some places, many of these factors are involved. Even in places with excellent and professional police agencies and response times, one fact remains: even if one can call the police, and officers are available, the police cannot possibly respond in time when lives are under imminent threat.
Circa 2022, in many D/S/C ruled cities, the police have been defunded, officers that could have fled to sane cities and states, and remaining officers are not allowed to actually enforce the law. In fact, their numbers are so depleted, they have to ignore most 911 calls, and are doing essentially no misdemeanor enforcement. In such places, politicians think police response to 911 calls is “white privilege,” and have acted accordingly. Even if politicians pretend to allow officers to do their duty, smart officers won’t. They know they’re far more likely to be prosecuted for doing their jobs than the criminals they arrest, most of who, due to socialist Soros prosecutors, will be immediately released and never prosecuted.
If you truly do not accept that human beings have an inherent, unalienable right to self-defense, and you wish to live your conviction, it’s possible you’re not around to read this, survival of the fittest being a rather inescapable proposition.
What, by the way, does “unalienable” mean? Most dictionaries that haven’t changed to universally woke definitions—yes; they’re actually doing that–would indicate that it means something like: “not transferrable to another,” or “cannot be repudiated,” but in the language of the Founders and of our founding documents, the word is most often coupled with an equally important word and is rendered as “unalienable rights.” Unalienable rights are the inheritance of each human being by virtue of being born a human being; they are bestowed by the Creator. Because they are not established and granted by government, they can’t be taken away by government, at least not legitimately. The Declaration of Independence makes explicit three “unalienable” rights: “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” but makes clear these are not the only unalienable rights.
Notice that “life” is the first of the three Thomas Jefferson—the author of the Declaration–chose to make explicit. This is important in that if there is no unalienable right to life, your life is forfeit to any person, to any government that chooses to take it, for it is such a government’s whims that dictate who is worthy of continued existence, as the 2020 “summer of love” with it’s “mostly peaceful protests,” so graphically illustrated.
It should also be noted that even if the laws and legal traditions of the state do recognize a right to self-defense–-on paper–-if the state denies citizens the most effective means to exercise that right, or so restricts its exercise as to make it impractical or impossible in application—as is currently the case in Washington D.C., New York, Oregon and California among other D/S/C-controlled cities and states, there is little difference to the individual between those cities/states and one that recognizes no right at all. In 2022, California, Illinois and New York took top honors for declining populations as their citizens fled for free states.
Should one think the courts will defend unalienable rights, consider the split between D/S/C judges, and judges who uphold the Constitution, remains as wide as ever.
In June of 2022, the Supreme Court rendered its Bruen decision, which expanded on Heller (2008) and McDonald (2010), making clear Americans enjoy an unalienable right to keep and bear arms in public. Bruen also established strict scrutiny as the only permissible means of deciding Second Amendment cases. Even so, some D/S/C states and cities continue to write blatantly unconstitutional laws, and also do everything they can to make exercising the Second Amendment expensive, difficult and even nearly impossible. These efforts will probably eventually fail, but it will take years for them to work their way through the courts, and absent painful punishments for those who would deny Americans their rights, the process of obstruction will begin anew.
If there is no right to self-defense, no right to mere survival, your life is forfeit to the whims of those cruel and strong enough to take it. This may not be a concern if you are a young, strong, physically imposing male well schooled and practiced in the martial arts. However, even the strongest may be overcome by force of numbers or trickery (ask Samson about that), and no one is young forever, as Edmond Rostand made plain in Cyrano De Bergerac.
In this understanding is the ultimate women’s issue, for women are nearly universally and undeniably in trouble where physical size, strength and aggression are the primary determinants of mere survival.
Some would have us believe refusing to pay with tax dollars for every woman’s contraception–which is cheap and available at every pharmacy in the nation–constitutes a “war on women.” The real war on women is now waged on behalf of trans “activists,” and anti liberty/gun “cracktivists” continually seeking to deny women their athletic due, their identity, and to deny women the most effective means to preserve their lives.
If there is no right to self-defense, can any other right, unalienable or otherwise, truly be said to matter?
If a right is not unalienable, it is merely a privilege to be granted and rescinded by the state, but do we really want the state to treat our lives with the caring, efficiency and humanity employed by the Department of Justice that threatens the liberty of parents concerned about the sexual and political indoctrination and abuse of public health mandates affecting their children?
One of the most important political understandings free men can have is government has no conscience; it cares nothing for any individual.
No matter how much a given politician claims to care deeply for the welfare of “the people,” “the people” are at best an abstraction, as any one of “the people” may discover when they demand government recognize and honor their individual rights. This understanding is the necessary beginning of personal autonomy. Without it, one will always be a vassal of the state, the state the worth of whose vassals is measured always only in their utility in supporting and implementing the transient goals of the state.
These ideas did not originate with Jefferson and our other Founders in the late 1700’s. Thomas Cahill, in his insightful book The Gifts of the Jews, suggests that the paramount gift of the Jews, dating back to the time of Abraham, was the profound and original idea that each individual life has value, and each human being is precious and worthy of salvation, of an exalted existence after mortal existence ends. This idea is easily recognizable as one of the foundations of Christianity. However, ultimately all such discussions are about power, and the proper balance of power between the individual and the state.
For those who do not recognize God, or whose faith is entirely in the State, there is no question about the proper balance: the state is all- powerful; individuals have no intrinsic value and certainly no rights enforceable against government.
John Locke (1632-1704) was a proponent of natural rights, which are rights established by nature–-by nature’s God–-and are therefore unalienable. Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) tried to reconcile the inherent conflict between a society full of individuals possessed of competing, unalienable rights, and the need of humans beings to live together in communities, through the “Social Contract,” the proposition that in order to live together, individuals must surrender some degree of absolute autonomy while still retaining certain unalienable rights, the most important of these being life, liberty and property.
These three rights are the very foundation of our representative republic. This is the balancing of power–-for governments have powers; individuals have rights–-truly representative republics perform each day, and that, until the age of Obama, when it took a sharp leftward turn toward totalitarian power and racial animus, America performed far better than any other society. To the degree America retreats from full respect for and acknowledgment of any of these three, she retreats from a republican form of government into an inevitable state of nature, well described by English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) in his masterwork Leviathan, published in 1651. While some romanticize nature, Hobbes saw it more clearly and wrote that the state of man in a state of nature is “,,,solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” How could it be otherwise?
How could America descend to a state of nature? Surely this is impossible! Imagine that all electrical power is lost in your community, that all running water and sewer service is gone, that your vehicle doesn’t run because there are no gasoline deliveries. How long would it take for order to break down? Days? Hours? If you wish to study further, consider this interview of Dr. William Forstchen.
Circa 2022, our government is working hard to impose socialism. D/S/Cs rarely refer to America as a representative republic, instead using only “democracy.” They do this because they advocate the tyranny of the majority. Go here to read more about this inherently totalitarian concept. The Biden Meat Puppet Administration, D/S/C Representatives and Senators, and some RINOS are openly advocating for Marxism, an anti-liberty, anti-American ideology that murdered at least 100 million in the last century alone. D/S/C politicians have thrown away any pretense of honoring the Constitution and are openly advocating socialist policies. California, New York City and other blue cities have done away with bail, even for violent felonies, releasing criminals to commit additional crimes, and are even refusing to prosecute a wide variety of crimes. As 2023 dawns, Illinois is decriminalizing many violent felonies:
Understanding what these politicians and their millions of supporters intend is driving American’s current desire to be armed. Americans understand–-or at least intuit–-with financial collapse, tyranny, or any significant social disruption, society is plunged into a state of nature. Even many of the political left wisely do not actually trust government. A growing number of Black Americans and Hispanics are walking away from leftism. Donald Trump made historic inroads with Black and Hispanic Americans in the 2020 election, a trend that appears to be continuing.
The Social Contract is part of the foundation of our society. While we retain unalienable rights, they are not absolute, yet can only be infringed, in limited fashion, by due process under the rule of law. Tragically, over the last ten years, Americans have learned the self-imagined intellectual and moral elite—of both parties–do not respect and honor the Constitution. They believe American constitutionalism is outmoded, an annoying impediment to their political plans. Without a universal and willing belief in that essential American faith, liberty is in jeopardy and every man’s life hangs in the balance. When the Founders made references to God, they were not merely expressing personal religious conviction, but participating in a millennia old debate over the nature of God and man and man’s natural rights. They well knew the work of Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau and were certainly influenced by them, as are we all whether we recognize those names or know a word of their thought.
At the conclusion of the first Constitutional Convention (1787) a woman asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government the delegates had given Americans. Franklin is reported to have replied: “A republic, Madam, if you can keep it.” Whether we can keep it is still an open question, a question that may, in November of 2024, be answered. Was Donald Trump’s term in office no more than a temporary reprieve for liberty? Will House Republicans do more than talk in the final two years of the Meat Puppet presidency? Is the best we can hope for the future temporarily staving off the horrors of Marxism, or can we restore America, once and for all, to its promise of individual liberty? There is no question the Second Amendment is foremost in preserving its existence.
This has been, of necessity, a whirlwind tour of issues that have filled thousands of volumes over the centuries. By all means, read Hobbes, Locke, Plato, Aristotle, Rousseau, even Rostand (everyone should know Cyrano; much of drama follows its lead), and certainly The Declaration of Independence (Jefferson) and particularly The Constitution (primary author, James Madison—4th President of the US). The Bill of Rights may be found here. If you do, you’ll almost certainly be better read than the average Congressman or Senator. But without the basic understanding provided by this admittedly sketchy overview, it’s difficult to appreciate the gravity of the question that began this essay: do human beings have an unalienable right to self-defense?
That question, and more, will be discussed in the next installment of this series, next Tuesday. I hope to see you there.
I guess that Christmas spirit you posted about a couple days ago is all over.
Mike McDaniel said:
The spirit of Christmas lives in our hearts every day if we embrace Christ. Reality also exists every day, including Christmas day. And as you’ll discover should you read the rest of the series, the Lord makes quite clear the necessity and value, even the obligation, of self-defense.
The argument is not with any right of self-defense but rather to what extent a person needs to be armed, and armed with what. Seems more a debate regarding a parity in applied technology to cause death. David did quite well with a sling and a rock in asserting his right to defend himself… against a sword. But then again, Goliath wasn’t confronting him with an assault weapon, with a 30 round magazine.
Buck Turgidson said:
“to what extent a person needs to be armed…”. AH!…..the foolish ‘truth’ is exposed. Please clarify how your “extent” serves us, to save ourselves in lethal & murderous conflicts ?
Hey, I own guns… the difference between us is that I don’t live under the illusion that I need them to defend myself (which means killing someone else.. and calling it legal), or crazier yet, thinking I have some control over government I don’t like because I own one.
How many times in the course of the average person’s life are they confronted with a decision to defend one’s self with a firearm? Ah, wait.. all it takes is that one time, right? When that law abiding person decides to become un-law abiding? We have 350+ million of these things in circulation, owned by every sort of human being imaginable, available for all ages imaginable to get their hands on, for all kinds of reasons imaginable. You see, with me it’s the REASON you pretend to justify gun ownership… then hide behind the Second to justify no gun controls.
But.. that’s nothing but my opinion. The law says my reason for gun ownership (casual target shooting) is just as valid as you wanting to own a gun for political reasons… to make sure government stays in line, under the guise of self-defense.
Buck Turgidson said:
YOU don’t have a clue what “the difference between us is”…so don’t PRETEND that you do. Your arrogant “these things” is a commonplace motto for some, however I (me) would rather let the wolves decide on who is being served for dinner & it won’t be me or mine ! [ hope for the best…..prepare for the worst ]
A friend of ours retired from the Army after 20 years as a combat nurse. She served in the sandbox and has seen the elephant. Her daughter moved to the UK where she got married. One day, her husband was home sick. Someone broke in, he tried to stop the man and got beat up. The daughter came home and the bad guy was still there. She tried to stop him and the sh?t head told her that if she did not stop resisting, he would hurt her very badly. In the UK, there are no guns and the weaker are at the mercy of the stronger. On hearing this story, I was reminded of the wisdom of our founders with respect to being armed.
Mike McDaniel said:
Quite so. Self-defense also requires the means to employ it, and laws that recognize its necessity.
I have a little book with the Constitution, Declaration and Bill in it. I read it at least once every year. Do you?
How often do you read the Bible? I’m sorry, I didn’t mean the last issue of American Rifleman.. I mean the REAL Bible.
Somebody Special said:
I read the Bible frequently, though, probably not as much as I should. There is nothing in the Bible that I have ever found that suggests I should not defend my life and the lives of those I care about with lethal force. If you have a reference, please share. The means employed to defend oneself are based on individual choice, training, and availability. Using your example of David, the sling was an advanced weapon for its time. Like a bow, it provided valuable distance for its user making Goliath’s sword completely useless.
Again.. my issue is not about defending oneself in the face of danger.. but citing “self-defense” alone as being some sort of holy justification for gun ownership.
Mike McDaniel said:
Self-defense alone? If you read a bit more carefully you’ll see I’m referring to Natural rights, fundamental, unalienable rights, and common sense. Besides, self-defense alone is more than sufficient to justify the means necessary to preserve innocent life.
As long as “your” right to a self-defense” doesn’t get in the way of MY right to exist.
Somebody Special said:
I disagree. My right to self defense exists wherever I am. That right is absolute as long as I am alive. And your right to exist is only preserved by your own actions to protect that existence.
Ok.. so there ya go. From the point any living thing leaves the womb, or spawns from a seed in the ground, it’s a struggle to exist, which includes traits bestowed by natural evolution to assure a degree of self-preservation. How does any of that suggest it’s a “God-given right” to own a gun without controls or limitations as to use and ownership?
Mike McDaniel said:
When one persists in misrepresenting the words of others involved in debate, one loses credibility. You’ve been reading this scruffy little blog for years. You should know I’ve constantly reiterated the law governing the use of force, including deadly force. I’ve never once suggested the right to self-defense allows the unlimited, ungoverned application of force, quite the opposite. I’ve also repeatedly explained, as I will yet again in this series, what unalienable rights mean in theory and application. Yet you ignore that reality and argue falsely. Why is that, I wonder?
Because there is no precedent set forth in the “original” Constitution that declares any “right” to self-defense, much less that being the reason to own a gun.. without regulatory protections. As I’ve stated elsewhere… SCOTUS has interpreted the Second does affirm that.
Mike McDaniel said:
Good grief. So did the founders, you know, the people who wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and explained, in detail why they did both?
I prefer to go by what’s in the Constitution, not peripheral commentary after the fact, which is not law.
Somebody Special said:
Whether you consider it God-given or natural law, a person has the right to self defense with whatever tools they are comfortable and competent with. And I want that to be overwhelmingly in my favor. It’s like the old saying goes, “If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck.”
Yet we are a nation of laws for the benefit of all, to create a society where we might engage in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Morally, if we need 350 million guns to “protect” ourselves then something is not working in society. In fact, the proliferation of firearms itself has led to increased concern for needing one. The demand feeds itself.
Mike McDaniel said:
What is “not working in society” is the minds of those who deny human nature. We arm ourselves not just for self-defense, but that is the ultimate, necessary reason for going armed, because evil exists and may confront the good and moral at any time and any place. The demand is in response to a clear understanding of human nature and potential threats.
Evil does in fact exist. But even that definition is subjective. Where does your “law-abiding” end and evil begin? Does that even matter given everyone has a gun now? The threat is within us… or more to the point, the threat IS us.
Besides, the Constitution makes no reference to any right of self-defense. None. Nada. It took a SCOTUS interpretation of the Second to decide that. I fully do not agree, but I will defend the institutions of the Constitution and their decisions, or work within the confines of the Constitution to affect change.
Mike McDaniel said:
Dear Somebody Special:
Quite so. As I’ll explain yet again in this series, the unalienable right to self-defense includes access to weapons that allow women, the infirm and elderly, and even those not big and strong, to protect themselves against unlawful attacks by the strong and evil. It is, as I’ve so often said, the ultimate women’s issue. As I’ve so often written, if we do not have the right to lawful self-defense, what other right matters?
Somebody Special said:
I completely agree, we are a nation of laws. Unfortunately, those laws are being applied less equally to Americans. We’ve seen a lurching cultural shift based on leftist/communist ideology. Criminals are released for violent crimes without the burden of posting bail. Violent crime, and crime overall, has skyrocketed. People realize they are their own first responder and are flocking in droves to their gun stores as police departments are decimated by leftist politicians. It’s not a gun problem, knife problem, or blunt object problem.
You’ve not isolated “a problem” at all, but rather a collection of unrelated symptoms at best. First off, what exactly is this “leftist/communist” cultural shift exactly? Second, “Criminals are released for violent crimes without the burden of posting bail.” is far too generalized a statement. The concept is far more detailed and for far more detailed reasons. It’s certainly not a woke-up-one-morning-and-dreamnt-this-up-to-impose-an-end-of-America-agenda.
“Violent crime, and crime overall, has skyrocketed.” In many places of the country, absolutely. Causes? Like most social issues, it’s complex and is not just flippantly assigned to political ideology.
Absolutely people are running to gun stores. And you’ve determined this demand for guns is all due to “decimated police departments by leftist politicians”, or is that what Breitbart, Tucker, or the NYPost tells you to believe?
Pingback: Daily Top 5 - The DaleyGator