Senate Bill 18 in Ohio: Pandering to the fearful, panic driven voter and beta men

Ohio Senator Shirley Smith (D-Cleveland) recently introduced Senate Bill 18, drafted to ban all “assault weapons,” broadly defined as any firearm capable of carrying “ten or more” rounds of ammunition. In a February 12 release, the Senate Democratic Caucus listed the legislation as one of its ten priorities for the current session.  In a wonderful discussion on 55 KRC recently Brian Thomas challenged the premise of Senate Bill 18 with one of the supporting senators in what became a rather vigorous exchange that articulated the gun argument in modern politics very accurately.  Have a listen.

If passed, the bill – co-sponsored by Edna Brown, Eric Kearney, Michael Skindell, Charleta Tavares, and Nina Turner, all Democrats – would also create a government registry to track all gun and ammunition purchases in the state, maintained by the Attorney General’s Bureau of Criminal Investigation.  The Bill as proposed is the result of overly emotional legislators who are responding to the lobby power of overly emotional voters, who spend much of their time afraid of their own shadows.  This tendency alone does not make them dangerous to the pursuits of freedom.  However, as voters, the fearful are represented in a republic just as much as the brave, and from the political vantage point of the progressive—and their most ardent champion—the Democratic Party, fear is the way they advance their causes of liberalism.

Progressives use fear to expand education spending without results, they use fear to expand government such as what has been seen over the sequester cuts, they use fear to pass police levies, fire levies, and virtually every government program where a legislator writes words into law to appease the weak and small-minded.  It can be argued accurately that the trouble of our modern society is that we have allowed the frailest minded to dictate our path toward socialism through their lack of personal courage.

Senate Bill 18 is driven by these fearful forces.  Their historical accomplices might have been the Mayan society who cut out the heart of a captured enemy to appease the God’s so that their crops would manifest and their city residents would not starve from lack of food.  The advocates of gun control wish to believe that if they impose upon society a weaponless culture that human beings will be forced to embrace each other with intentions of peace.  But they are wrong, terribly wrong.  Their folly is rampant with voodoo like superstition that has no basis in reality and simply settles in their minds the illusion of security.

For a long time the courageous in society have yielded to these panicky politicians and voters so not to hurt their feelings.  It was out of compassion that the American brave shook their heads and treated these law driven entities like children afraid of bolts of lightning that streak across the sky.  But that time has closed, as the brave in America have seen the result of such capitulation.  American society is on its way to becoming just another third world country reeking with rule by superstition instead of bold logic, and we don’t like it.  This realization has given rise to the Tea Party and other liberty pursuing groups that are putting the arguments on the table for discussion in some instances such as in the Brian Thomas discussion for the first time.

Brian Thomas on 55 KRC has stood up for Second Amendment rights for many years—well before there was ever a Tea Party movement.  But the discussions were often categorized as radical conspiracy theory by a far right fringe mentality.  But the viewpoint of gun rights is not a political ideology of the right or the left.  It is of the bold and the weak.   Gun advocates wish to be in charge of their own lives and not trust their life or death to the devices of government.  Government can’t even get public education correct, let alone show up at a home at 2 AM to prevent the robbery of a family defending their property from a villain.

After listening carefully to the words of the senator in the Brian Thomas interview I am convinced that progressives seek to hide their natural cowardness from society with a blanket of security provided by government.  Progressives wish to think themselves equal to the courageous, without being actually brave.  Therefore the cost of government is so great in 2013 because the trend in America is to grow up as soft minded overly emotional, individuals that conglomerate like animal herds to celebrate their lack of courage.  Government expands to provide security to the masses who have allowed their minds to be fearful of every possible tragedy, and to hedge their lives against those threats not by their own actions, but those of collective security.

America is supposed to be the land of the free and home of the brave.  The brave are the backbone of America, and the Constitution assumes that it will be the brave who will defend America from all forms of tyranny, both foreign and domestic.  The Second Amendment is for the brave, who should be on hand to eliminate threats as they happen, not afterwards.  The brave could have prevented Sandy Hook in the halls of that school if such a place would openly embraced in empowering the brave to defend the weak.  It could have prevented Aurora if the entire audience hadn’t been disarmed before seeing a movie in that tragic Colorado shooting.  It is the brave who always protects the weak, and that needs to be celebrated.  There is no law that can truly protect the weak from the parasitic aggressive—only the brave can.  Only the courageous can defend America from those who wish to harm it and that is why there is a Second Amendment.  The brave do not ask the weak to be courageous.  They only ask the feeble-minded to stay out-of-the-way while the strong perform their work—and to have the respect to not muddy the waters of the electorate with cries for more politicians to pander to the whims of the deficient.  Even the beta man has a role in the grand tapestry of society.  They may excel at presenting spreadsheets for fiscal planning; they may even have a fresh perspective on an idea.  They may invent the next great thing in society—but they may not be good with a gun, or putting down a potential rapist attempting to impose themselves on an unwilling victim.  But they should respect those who are good at such things.  Because the best gun control is putting them in the hands of those who know what to do with them, and are brave enough to use those skills to keep society truly safe, with the valor that comes naturally to a minority of the population.

The videos above are America’s version of gun control.

Rich Hoffman

“If they attack first………..blast em’!”