When you read about the recent attacks by a deranged madman, do you blame yourself? Make no mistake, if you own a gun or believe in the First or Second (or any other) Constitutional amendments, those who hate your liberty (and I'm not referring to Muslim extremists, but rather to communitarian extremists) blame you.
Jared Lee Loughner is being called a "right wing extremist" simply because he used a gun, and because it suits the communitarians' needs at the moment. But consider what Gary Gibson wrote about it:
"Libertarians, conservatives, Tea Party members, advocates of small governments of every stripe, anyone who’s ever criticized the government too vigorously…They’re being told to “tone it down a bit.” The complaint from lovers of the state is that we’ve gotten too vicious, that all the strong words have finally led to someone taking extreme measures.
Never mind that the shooter was a just a lone nut whose main concern with government was that it was using mind control.
One does not list the Communist Manifesto or Mein Kampf in one’s top ten list if one is for smaller government. In fact, anyone who thinks these books belong in the same list as We the Living— a warning against the dangers of communism — cannot be thinking too clearly.
And it seems that Loughner wasn’t thinking too clearly at all. In fact, he seems to have had all the usual earmarks of the mentally unbalanced who occasionally pop up and kill somebody famous or slaughter innocents in a fast food joint or from atop a tower.
Jared Lee Loughner didn’t kill and injure all those people because he listened to Sarah Palin…or because he loved liberty. He did it because he was a murderous lunatic."
Blaming gun owners and freedom lovers for this tragedy is exactly the same as blaming all car owners and anyone who occasionally has a glass of wine with dinner when a drunk driver causes an accident, or blaming handymen when a murderer stabs someone with a screwdriver. Any thinking person can understand that you are only responsible for what you do. But collectivists want to convince you that you are not an individual, but rather a constituent of a larger group, a group in which each member is liable for what any other member does. This is a ludicrous assumption, but one which is accepted by many because of a psychological phenomenon called brainwashing.
What brainwashing, you ask? Just as an experiment, watch the evening news or read a major newspaper, while listening for preconceived notions. These notions are spoken or unspoken ideas that are simply assumed to be true, and without which the slant of the story doesn't work. In other words, to accept the story as truth, you must accept the underlying idea. The most common of these underlying ideas is that the local, county, state and federal governments are the authorities we should all be looking to for answers to any problem, and that anyone who does not defer to these entities in everything they do is suspect at best, because (preconceived notion) everyone should consider the needs of his community before the needs of his family and himself.
The communitarian authorities do not seek to prevent actions of a lone nutcase, so much as they seek to use such actions as an excuse to exert ever more control over your life. Representative Peter King (a Republican, btw; not a Democrat) wants to pass a law making it a felony to have a gun within a thousand feet of lawmakers and other government officials. If such a law were passed, driving within three blocks of a courthouse while exercising your Second Amendment right would result in prison time and permanent loss of your rights, if you got caught. And with the license plate recognition software now included in some police cruiser computers, if you were pulled over by the police for some minor infraction, were carrying your personal defensive weapon at the time, and the cruiser's dashcam recorded a passing vehicle that was registered to a judge or representative, the computer could instantly alert the cop to arrest you on the felony charge.
Taking it a bit further, who would be surprised when, a few years down the road, the supreme court ruled that the law could include law enforcement officers in the protected class. At that point, there would effectively be no more right to keep and bear arms, since anyone in possession of a gun would instantly become a felon when approached by a cop. They would have to keep that ruling hidden to most folks by only occasionally using it, but it would remain in the repertoire of weapons the local DA can use against you, much like the ruling of a few years ago that the inside of your vehicle is a public area.
Back to the point, there is even some speculation that this was a false-flag event. Taking that tack any further is beyond the scope of this article, but the search engines are your friend.
Coming into Focus
2 hours ago