Free Markets, Free People

The political strategy of a crocodile tear

Mr. Obama shed a tear yesterday as he told us why he was going to bypass Congress and enact gun control (at least a small part of it) by executive order.  Speaking of “gun violence” instead of violence in general, he said:

“We do not have to accept this carnage as the price of freedom,” Obama said.

That’s simply poppycock. We don’t have to like it but freedom, as has been said any thousands of times, is not free.  Nor is it pretty or neat.  Nor are there those who don’t suffer because of it. It always has a cost – a price. But the alternative, what most Democrats seem to want, is the state deciding everything you can or cannot do, everything you can or cannot own.  That alternative is unacceptable to those who value freedom and are willing to suffer the cost.

No one is in favor of “carnage”.  But it isn’t the guns which cause the violence, sir.  Figure it out please.  When you tell me that abortion instruments are what kill about a million unborn human beings in the US each year, perhaps I’ll at least consider your thinking to be somewhat consistent.  And of course, that means cars and pools and rope, well you name it, also need to be controlled even more because the “carnage” they cause rivals anything to do with that involving guns.

Gee, given the numbers, perhaps he ought to be going after Planned Parenthood instead of demonizing the NRA.

Oh, and this was rich:

“No matter how many times people try to twist my words around, I taught constitutional law, I know a little bit about this. I get it,” he said. “But I also believe that we can find ways to reduce gun violence consistent with the Second Amendment.”

Apparently he thinks he knows the Constitution, but if true, he’d know it doesn’t allow aristocracy, and certainly it doesn’t allow kings.  Laws are passed through Congress and if the President doesn’t have the heft or gravitas or whatever he needs to see it done, then it doesn’t get done. Obama doesn’t have any of that. And the people have been quite clear that they don’t consider guns or gun control to be much of an issue.  In fact, it barely registers, no pun intended. So instead he  does “work arounds” with executive orders.  Tell us again about how you know the Constitution, please?

But let’s get to the nuts and bolts of what went on yesterday, shall we?  It is about, get ready for it, ideology:

Despite professing an unflinching commitment to curbing gun violence, Obama and Biden have been thwarted by Congress and what Obama calls a lack of national will to change the way Americans think about guns.

Got it.  It’s about changing the way you think about guns.  Its about making them the equivalent of a cigarette.  You remember when cigarettes were popular?   And what happened?  Well, think about it.  It wasn’t about people making poor choices and suffering for them that was the “cause” of their diseases. It wasn’t about their refusal to heed the strident warnings about smoking.  It became “the cigarette”.  That was the “cause”. And it was the cigarette that was killing people, not the people’s choices.  The object became the problem.  People were excused for making poor decisions even though the information that cigarettes caused horrific health problems had been out for years … decades.

The same sort of argument is being made about guns and “the strategy of a tear” was just the latest emotional appeal to a people who’ve been pretty darn logical about guns so far and aren’t buying into the argument as readily as they did with cigarettes.  In fact, they’re not buying into it at all and are, instead, buying more and more guns.  If you can’t get them to swing your way, cry on national TV.  That’ll show ’em how sincere you are.   And, of course, it seems to have fooled a good number of people out there already.

But to the point – this is frustration for Obama because you and most Americans won’t think the way he wants you to.  So?  So screw you, he’ll stamp his feet, hold his breath and make you do it by taking unilateral action.  But he knows the Constitution, by George.

This is just another in a long line of tantrums by this man.  When he can’t get his way, he simply looks for a means to impose his will.  He has no concept of what a President is or what one is supposed to do and he’s certainly no Constitutional scholar.  This is just the latest example.

So why is the cigarette model not working for the left?  For the most part it is because there really is no redeeming value to a cigarette.  But there is tremendous positive value to a gun.  You can’t defend yourself or your family with a cigarette.  You can’t feel more secure in your person with a cigarette.  You can’t protect your life or your property with a cigarette.  So despite the demonization of the object the left has committed itself too, the positive aspects of gun ownership simply won’t be buried, even with a tear.

The bottom line however should be clear – the left will do whatever it thinks necessary to strip Americans of their right to own firearms.  You will see every sort of argument tendered and numbers that, without context, seem horrific.  Such as “30,000” gun deaths – 62% of which are suicides.  Anyone who believes removing guns will prevent suicide just isn’t very serious about discussing suicide.  Japan, which has strict gun control laws, has more suicides than the US.  The problem isn’t the means.  It is the mental state of the person.  35% are homicides, most gang related.  No matter the laws passed, criminals are not going to obey them.  This seems to be a point the left can’t comprehend.  And finally accidents claim most of the remainder (about 606 in 2010).  “Mass shootings”?  A small minority of the final total.  And, in fact, gun violence and gun homicides are and have been trending down for quite some time.

However, like “climate change”, the alarmist hysteria continues despite the fact that the data doesn’t support it.

So now, it is all about an emotion.  A tear.

My freedom isn’t for sale for a tear, crocodile or otherwise, Mr. Obama.



Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

7 Responses to The political strategy of a crocodile tear

  • Per an article from “The Hill”, The President is not circumventing Congress on gun control.
    “Jarrett argued that Obama is using his presidential powers to strengthen firearms regulations after Republicans repeatedly blocked his past efforts.
    “We are trying to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them [and] we want to keep our communities safe,” she said.
    “Obviously, the president made a very strong effort to work with Congress,” Jarrett continued. “We just had a hard time getting Republicans to take what most people think are reasonable steps.”

    See we don’t understand the Constitution like they do, and Obama HAS to do these things because Congress won’t take action.
    If Congress doesn’t do what the President likes fast enough, or at all, or without some negotiation that goes beyond “I won” (implicitly do what I tell you), then President Precious can issue edicts because it’s what he wants and what he says various majorities want, and we just can’t wait…
    Constitutional ‘professor’ can show us where that’s covered in the actual document, right?

    Another interesting thing that Dumbo mentioned as a throwaway to demonstrate the problem is the some loophole…
    He runs down the shootings list –
    “It wasn’t the first time I had to talk to the nation in response to a mass shooting, nor would it be the last. Fort Hood. Binghamton. Aurora. Oak Creek. Newtown. The Navy Yard. Santa Barbara. Charleston. San Bernardino. Too many.”

    And what do the bookends for that list have in common besides gun show loopholes and fictitious abilities for massive gun buying without background checks across the internet?
    That’s right – work place violence!

    100% involve gunzzzzzzz obviously.
    But 25% of the mass shootings he listed were related to Islam.
    That’s a pretty damned high number tied to a single cause for shootings since the rest are only related in that the shooters were whackjobs who had gunzzzzzzzzz.

    So, we can expect Executive ‘regulations’ on followers of Islam any time now, right?
    After all, He reminds us in the speech the Right to Bear Arms isn’t an absolute freedom, speech isn’t an absolute freedom, why is there an absolute unrestricted right to practice a peaceful religion who’s followers go around shooting people?
    Just sayin.

  • David Burge @iowahawkblog

    Here’s a way to immediately cut US gun homicides by 5%: give Chicago to Canada
    12:05 PM – 5 Jan 2016

    411 411 Retweets

    Hey…that just might work…!!!

  • But, people do make “poor choices” … in 2008 … and then again in 2012

  • This summer my wife popped up with “We need to get a gun. I want a gun.”
    Two weeks later we took a CHCL class. There were 3 couples and 7 other women.
    We generally go to the range on Saturday and I always peek into the classroom. There are generally 3 times as many women as men. The instructor told me that there have been many times when it was all women and zero men.

    They used to hold the class 1 or 2 times a month, always on Saturday. Now they have a class EVERY Saturday and it is always full. They even had a class on Dec 26, the day after Christmas. Full. Three guys – buddies, not with wives. Twelve women.

    Women get it.


    Sometimes, you just can beat a good cartoon.