Why do liberals want to seize everyone’s guns? Eliminating the ownership of guns looks good on paper, but it is not realistic, because there will always be a black market. No gun law will eliminate the black market; I guarantee it. The black market always functions as an avenue through which to buy things that are deemed illegal, and guns will always be available for a price.
You see, guns are power. Criminals will always find a way to get guns, because guns enable criminals to exercise power over their prey. If you eliminate guns, then you enable criminals to exercise power over those who do not have guns, but the ordinary citizen will be left without the ability to defend themselves. Most of the time when a crime is committed, the criminal is already gone when the police with guns arrive; therefore, in most cases the police guns were useless in preventing the crime. If the victim had possessed a gun, then quite possibly the criminal would have been stopped from doing harm.
“But less guns mean less crimes”, they might say. To make this statement is to suggest, that we are willing to live with some crime; as long as, it is less crime, but tell that to the person who was harmed or is dead. As a logical person, I do not just want less crime; I want to prevent criminals from hurting me and my loved ones. The liberals cannot possibly make good on any promise to keep me and my family safe by decreasing the number of guns.
I can guarantee you, that people who own guns can stop a criminal in the very act, and I have every right to defend myself, my family, and the innocent from harm.
So this raises a serious question: Are liberals not intelligent enough to figure this out, or do they want to take guns out of the hands of conservatives? If the answer is: Liberals want to take guns out of the hands of conservatives, then liberals want to render conservatives defenseless. If liberals do not wish to own firearms, that is their own business, but for liberals to insist that we all give up our guns is transgressing into the area that is none of their business. Liberals do not have a right to take away my ability to defend myself and my family.
I have one more thing to say here. Why is the government using the mental-capacity-excuse to disarm veterans? The government arms and trusts soldiers to kill whomever the government deems to be the enemy; however, when the soldier finishes his tour of duty, the government no longer trusts that man to possess a firearm domestically? There is something very sinister about this. I submit to you, that the-powers-that-be have very unAmerican plans for our country. Firearms in the hands of the citizenry poses a serious problem to them bringing their plans to fruition and especially firearms in the hands of former soldiers (veterans), because they have experience in stopping the enemy with deadly force.
The founding fathers were very aware of this type of unbridled government power, and this is one of the most important reasons the founding fathers created the 2nd amendment. Guns in the hands of the citizenry serve as a deterrent to would-be dictators and coupe attempts. King George of England had become a tyrant with insufficient checks and balances on his power against the colonists.
The federal government, and in this case the Obama administration, is very clever in using the false notion of the benefits of gun-control as an excuse to disarm all the citizenry, and liberals/progressives gullibly fall for the false argument hook, line and sinker.
Luke 22:36, “Then said Jesus unto them, but now he that has a purse let him take it, and likewise his scrip, and he that has no sword let him sell his garment and buy one.”