In the fall of last year, many middle-aged Americans rolled their eyes as college students organized sit-ins at Princeton, and in universities and colleges across the country. Many of the students still demanded they be excused from classes and assignments, so that they could participate in the protests without affecting their grades. Many Americans paid little attention to these protests as long as they were non-violent. They chalked it up to the students being young and impassioned.
Thursday, America witnessed a similar sit-in protest; only it was our lawmakers, and not some young, idealistic college upstart. Legislators charged with representing the people of the United States in the House of Representatives organized the sit-in.
The sit-in that saw our lawmakers turn into petulant children holding their collective breath, in an attempt to get their way. There are areas where passing laws, even in the Federal Government, is a relative no-brainer. When America voted to enter World War II; there was only a single vote against entering the war. However, the politicizing of everything from gun rights to school lunches often takes that simplicity out of American government.
In an incarnation of the Federal Government that intrudes into the daily lives of the people more than ever, we should not be surprised at the sight of such degradation as it continues to unfold in the House. The reason that the argument persists is two-fold.
First, it is a ridiculous argument that expanding gun control can eradicate the issue of radical Islamic terrorism; a fact that gun rights advocates have strenuously tried to point out. Terrorists don't care how they get the weapons to perpetrate their crimes. They also don't care whether the so-called "assault rifle" that they are employing is banned or not. Similarly, terrorists are not running scared at the sight of signage that reads "gun-free zone."
There is a big difference between feeling safe and being safe. By and large, the average citizen that is for expanding gun control knows very little about guns. They look at the "scary looking guns" and wonder what kind of person needs a weapon like that. They don't like the idea of anyone owning a gun because they don't "feel safe."
Responsible gun owners take the time to learn about guns. They train to become proficient with them. They know that their lives may depend on it. Many are former military or law enforcement. These are people that should have guns, proven by training and profession, to be proficient with guns.
Second, the stalemate that we see in our federal legislature is pure stubbornness on the part of Democrats. No tragedy justifies taking away the rights of law-abiding people. The notion of trying to expand gun control, in a country built by individuals who secured their independence by using guns, is ridiculous. A fact that proves that those for expanding gun control, don't understand the foundations of America.
Trying to use the system to push gun control in America, is a lot like trying to tighten a bolt with a hammer. You won't damage the hammer, and you won't tighten the bolt. Individual rights are innate. It is at best nearly impossible to separate the people from their rights. The Bill of Rights does not grant rights to the people; it limits those of government.
The conversation that escapes such members of Congress is that actions taken against responsible, law-abiding Americans will never stop terrorism. The only thing that can stop terrorism is not only calling the enemy out for what they are. We must show them what America does to those who threaten the liberty of her people.
As, political commentator Dana Loesch put it, "We are two-time world war champs." At the end of the day what is holding us back from winning the fight, is that political correctness has our hands tied behind our backs. Gun control hinders us in this battle. It's been 233 years since we have had to fight a war on our own soil. That's largely because of our right to bear arms. If the Federal Government wants to stop domestic terrorism; the last thing they ought to do is limit our right to bear and keep arms, until recently it has kept us all safe.