Like vultures, the gun-grabbing left (including the full body politic of the Democratic caucus in the House of Representatives) has pounced on the awful death scene in Orlando in the wake of the most heinous Islamic jihad attack on America since 9/11 in order to conduct its latest sickening feast at the trough of human suffering. Demonstrating once again an utter inability to modulate their views according to the facts, which in this case should have awakened liberal America to the very real and present danger of Muslim terrorism, leftists instead have chosen for the umpteenth time to ignore the bellicose ideology of the Islamic canon that propelled the murderer to do his despicable deed. Doggedly persistent in their straw man arguments against gun rights, leftists revel in foisting blame for this act of war against our nation on law-abiding gun owners, the NRA, Republicans, Donald Trump, Christians, and the Constitution. Their willful ignorance of history, their disdain for liberty, and their gross misuse of the victims and the grieving families in order to pursue their hate-America, anti-Second Amendment agenda is beyond disgraceful.Once again we see gun grabbers figuratively dancing in the blood of victims, which is unseemly. Add to it the fact that our Representatives chose to take a common street action move, the sit in, on the floor of the House of Representatives, shows their utter disdain for American republicanism, the Constitution, and the people they represent. But how does all this tie in with Jim Crow? For that, Steinreich takes us on a trip through history:
When the Second Amendment was enacted, the ordinary citizens of each state served as a de facto "well-regulated militia," which checked the potential advances against civil liberties by an avaricious central government. There was little need for crime prevention departments or standing armies in America's founding period because those first Americans took responsibility for the policing and defense of their own communities. But the left argues: because our 21st-century society currently has well developed professional police forces, those 19th-century militias are unneeded; there's a cop just a phone call away, so what does the Second Amendment actually do for us now other than to give ne'er-do-wells a legal right to get a killing tool?...snip...
The irrationality of the left's position on guns is put into stark relief when juxtaposed against their vicious anti-police attitude. On one hand, the left demands a the disarming of the general public so that only trained law enforcement professionals on the public payroll have guns, and on the other hand, they lambaste the police as a uniformly racist, anti-minority posse eager, willing, and able to shoot to kill unarmed African-American men because of their skin color. If we understand the Second Amendment as a hedge against government tyranny, would it not make sense for minorities to have legal access to firearms to protect themselves against the Klan-like men in blue patrolling minority neighborhoods, salivating over the opportunity to pick off the first available black man?
Furthermore, are not thousands of young black men and women in these neighborhoods dying on an annual basis at the hands of lawbreakers who have no regard whatsoever for gun laws? Since the police themselves present a threat to black Americans, shouldn't the innocent citizens in minority communities have the right to arm themselves against the urban terrorists who shoot and murder them at will? Ask the families of Jamiel Shaw and Hadiya Pendleton if they wish they could turn back the hands of time in order to put a firearm in their hands when these innocent teens were murdered in cold blood by violent gang members while merely walking through their own neighborhoods. Such killings mean nothing to the left other than to serve as a cudgel against the constitutional right to bear arms.And there we are. Modern day Jim Crow. But go read how we got here, because it is an interesting story in and of itself. I had always thought that the Second Amendment should be supported by both the Left and Right, since either side could become tyrannical. But if you think about it, the side that wants to eliminate your right to keep and bear arms wont abide by those laws. Neither should you.