This post is to remind you of two seemingly unconnected things, dear readers, that are connected - first, the plight of the people in Zimbabwe who have suffered much and deserve better than to be starved and beaten by a Left-wing scumbag desperate to hold power; and second, why the Supreme Court's recent Heller decision on gun rights is so important to a free democracy.
The Heller decision??" I hear you ask.
Yes, the Heller decision. For the first time in modern history, the right of an individual to his or her self-preservation has been specifically recognized as belonging to, well, the individual. And further, the individual has the right to the means necessary to exercise that right.
Now, the connection. Go read the post below again and ask yourself this question - would Mr. Mugabe'c criminal regime still be in power if all Zimbabweans could be armed, as we can be in America, instead of only Mr. Mugabe's armed thugs? Can criminal violence flourish, government-sponsored or otherwise, when the victims have the means to defend themselves?
Mr. Mugabe asks, "How can a ballpoint fight with a gun?" He, like most thugs in power already knows the answer - which is why only his side is armed. The ballpoint only wins when the people who hold the ballpoint in one hand hold the means to enforce it in the other. When that is all of the people, the ballpoint always wins; the government must respect the will of the people or be swept away.
Any ruthless thug knows they can do what they want if you can't stop them. Mao understood this. So did Adolph Hitler. So does your common street criminal. It is deeply troubling, therefore, that those in our own country who advocate banning or repealing our right to defend ourselves have forgotten where the anti-gun rights impulse in America comes from.
No comments:
Post a Comment