On January 16, 2013, Barack Obama sat down at a desk surrounded by four young children and signed a series of executive orders aimed at curbing gun violence. The children, who were between the ages of 8 and 11, apparently wrote letters to the former president pleading with him to tighten gun laws in the weeks following the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. 10-year-old Taejah Good wrote to Obama, “I am writing you to ask you to stop gun violence. I am very sad about the children who lost their lives in Connecticut.” Another child, 8-year-old Grant Fritz, wrote, “It’s a free country but I recommend there needs to be a limit with guns. Please don’t let people own machine guns or other powerful guns like that.”
Oh, how convenient it was that such young children had such strong opinions on gun control; opinions that just so happened to align with Barack Obama’s radical agenda.
It really is sick and twisted, but liberals are willing to do just about anything they have to in order to ram their totalitarian ideology down the throats of the American people, even if it means putting children in the crosshairs. What’s worse is that they don’t see anything wrong with it whatsoever. While most people tend to believe that using children for political gain is unethical and immoral, to the left, it’s perfectly acceptable. As their idol Saul Alinsky once wrote in Rules for Radicals, the ends always justify the means.
A recent article published in Forbes written by contributor Tara Haelle attempted to make the same argument that Barack Obama made four years ago — we need more gun control for the sake of the children, because without a massive federal government putting endless restrictions on the Second Amendment, the children will suffer.
The article, titled “Children Are Dying Because of Americans’ Denial About Guns,” starts off by listing some “facts” (if you even want to call them that) about the harmful effects that firearms have on young children. She goes on to list a series of studies that support her overall message, which is summarized nicely in the second to last paragraph: “[A]dmitting we have a problem is the first step to solve that problem,” she writes. “Yet a substantial proportion of the United States remains in denial about the severity, impact and scope of firearm violence in the U.S. and how unique it is in the world as an American problem. No other developed country in the world has firearm injury and death rates as high as those in the U.S.”
Even though there are most likely a number of things that are factually incorrect about Haelle’s article, let’s assume that everything she said was one hundred percent accurate. Let’s assume that America really is the most violent country on planet earth (which it is not) and that the United States is turning into the wild west (which it isn’t). What is the solution? How do we go about lowering the number of gun-related crimes that are committed each year? Do we scrap the Second Amendment and surrender our liberty to an all powerful centralized government? If the left had their way, then yes, that is exactly what we would do.
And yet, as we’ve learned time and time again, there is no connection whatsoever between the Second Amendment and Americans’ right to bear arms, and gun-related crime. Even in countries that don’t have a Second Amendment, such as Britain and Australia, there are still people who get their hands on a weapon — whether it’s a firearm, a knife, a baseball bat, a hammer, or just about anything else — and kill people. In other words, the problem isn’t that we have the constitutional right to bear arms; the problem is that we have a lot of mentally unstable individuals in this country who think nothing of doing unspeakable harm to others.
Perhaps Tara Haelle should take a trip to Chicago and see what it’s like when guns are outlawed altogether. Based on her logic, Chicago would be the perfect place to raise young children, right? No guns and no violence whatsoever… right? Follow more news on firearms and guns at Guns.news.