C-SPAN 3 broadcast a "China and Nuclear Security Policy" discussion, on 5/5/2016, sponsored by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Several interesting points have jumped out at me about the manner in which responsible international nuclear policy consultants and policy makers pursue that ongoing discussion, and the very careful manner in which they speak about, pursue, develop, and implement nuclear policy, here in the USA and abroad. The way in which these international discussions are defined and conducted can teach us a great deal about the ineffective way in which anti-gun and criminal policy have been articulated and implemented in the USA.
1. Too much of what happens in anti-gun rhetoric and anti-gun policy is knee-jerk in word and deed, and without any commonality of moral or constitutional language.
2. Too many in the unconstitutional anti-gun camp are willing to hold firearms, manufacturers, and law-abiding firearms owners responsible for the abuses perpetrated by those who have no love or respect for their fellow human beings, i.e. because of their constant harassment of and infringement upon law-abiding citizens' rights, anti-gunners act and speak as if criminals and mentally unbalanced persons do not have to be held personally accountable for their firearms related actions. Rather, by blaming the firearms, blaming the manufacturers, and blaming the legitimate owners, anti-gunners seem to think that the problems of criminal possession or criminal use can be fixed.
3. In attempts to preempt nuclear abuses, international nuclear discussions are increasingly driving the development of mutually understood and agreed upon language to describe the words and concepts that are used in those discussions, just as our Founding Fathers hammered out and negotiated our Federal and State Constitutions and our Federal Bill of Rights. That meticulous, deliberative, commonality-producing work has not happened in the anti-gun harangues and policies that have been launched against constitutional language, constitutional carry, and the free exercise of the constitutional rights of law-abiding us citizens.
4. Predictability of potential adversaries and potential combatants is critical in the strategic development of nuclear policy, yet for many decades state and federal US policies that attempt to control firearms have wholly depended on legislation and edicts that curtail and threaten orderly, constitutionally acceptable firearm purchases, ownership, use, and transfers, while neglecting to properly or adequately address the unpredictable and socially contrary objectives and actions of criminal and mentally ill elements of US society.
5. No responsible discussion of nuclear weapons ever seeks to blame nuclear arms for their own development, use, abuse, or proliferation, but rather, individual persons and nations are held to account for their choices in how they elect to proceed with respect to the development or use of nukes.
6. As with attempts to control inappropriate use of nuclear arms, unless anti-gun activists get criminals, and others who abuse firearms, to agree to sit down to discussions based in common language about law and consequences, predictability of behavior, and legitimate constitutional use of firearms, then there remain zero common objectives, zero common understanding, and zero common ground by which to establish a working dialog that might effect significant change in the behavior of those who have historically sought to criminally or irresponsibly obtain, distribute, or abuse firearms outside of the proper moral and constitutional context.
7. If international nuclear policy development and implementation were conducted in the same way as decades-old, anti-Constitution, US anti-gun sentiment and policy (which has depended on emotion-based ignorance of common constitutional language, lacking common definitions, and failing to promote predictable responsibility and self-control among those prone to violate US laws and our Constitution), then members of the the international community would be reaping a nuclear disaster comparable to the lawless firearms behavior that exists among criminal and insane persons who have no respect for, nor fear of, the plethora of US firearms laws that have increasingly infringed on law-abiding citizens. IF the anti-gun community is serious about wanting to stop violent human behavior, then the anti-gun community needs to, immediately, stop wasting its efforts that attack the rights of good citizens, and the anti-gunners need to start working to address the real criminals or insane persons who seek to do the rest of us harm. (As a factual aside, let's not forget that violent firearms attacks against people make up only 1/8th of the total violent attacks against people, according to the FBI.) If someone rapes or beats another person the attacker is held personally accountable, no matter what weapon is used to facilitate the attack. But, if someone is shot, then the gun is blamed, and demonized, more than the perpetrator. Blaming the weapon or the weapon manufacturer, instead of blaming the perpetrator, is crazy. Using the illogic of anti-gunners, they should be blaming God and suing Him, every time someone gets kicked or punched to death, since God created human hands and feet. Or He should be sued and blamed whenever an animal maims or kills a person. I guess that some people really may blame and hate God for those animal attacks.
Law helps define and punish chaos, but Law, by itself, without willing adherents, cannot prevent or control chaos. Only prepared, participating, responsible citizens can effect the proper and just implementation of a harmonious social plan, culture, moral, or legal system. Therefore, we, the lawful citizens of these United of America, must agree to biblical and constitutional order and prepare for chaos, and we must do so according to established, biblical, moral, and constitutional, Law and Principles.
For many decades, US firearms and criminal policies have not been pursued in a constitutional and rational manner that might have effectively protected US citizens and our Rights, while holding perpetrators of firearms violence responsible for their actions. Our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Law were NOT written to infringe upon the lives and freedoms of law-abiding citizens, but to define who we are versus those who would seek to establish themselves as enemies of God, of our Constitution and of our Rights. The job of Law is to define, stop, and punish evildoers who force their chaos upon the rest of society. Unlike the insane and criminal perpetrators of chaos, law-abiding, responsibly-armed citizens support and defend the morally principled stability of society.
No comments:
Post a Comment