The fact that racist-murderer Benjamin Nathaniel Smith was able to buy
guns illegally is being used by gun-control enthusiasts as a rationale
for more government regulation of firearms.

Think about that logic, folks. Smith tried to buy guns legally and
couldn’t get through the background check because of a protective order
against him from an ex-girlfriend. But he was not arrested for trying to
buy guns illegally. He was simply turned away.

His next step was to turn to the black market (which must have been a
tough call for a white supremacist). He had no trouble buying what he
needed to go on a drive-by shooting spree that killed two and left nine
wounded — Jews, blacks and Asians targeted because of their ethnicity
— before Smith killed himself.

Now you might think this incident would provide an illustration of
the futility of gun-control laws as means of preventing violent crime.
As the old saying goes, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have
guns.” Even a law prohibiting the sale of all firearms would not have
prevented Smith from getting his guns. He was determined. And the law
was not a factor. A man who is going to buy guns to kill innocent people
is hardly going to concern himself with breaking a gun law.

Yet, the Smith case is actually providing more fodder for the
gun-grabbers. Go figure.

You have to wonder what the gun-control zealots have in mind for
tougher laws to deal with the sale of firearms on the black market. By
definition, what those dealers are doing is already illegal behavior.
What Smith did even before he turned to the black market was illegal. He
was caught attempting to buy guns illegally, yet he was not charged.

There is only one logical conclusion you can draw from the way
federal gun laws are passed and enforced. Gun-control regulations, as we
understand them today, are not really meant to deter criminals from
getting their hands on guns. In fact, it serves the gun-grabbers’
interests when criminals get guns and use them, as Smith did, to commit violent
crimes. Every incident of this kind makes their cries for more
government control of firearms palatable to the American people.

So what is the purpose of the anti-gun laws? What is the real agenda?
Simple. It’s government empowerment. Notice who are the prime agitators
for more gun control. They are the same people who promote more
government control over all facets of our lives — education, health
care, childcare, the economy. They seek, ultimately, the complete
disarmament of the civilian population of the United States. They will
never stop whining about gun violence until they pry the guns from our
cold, dead fingers.

Why? The government-control advocates want us to place our fate in
the hands of the state. Our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor
should be entrusted to the police for protection, they say. Again,
Benjamin Nathaniel Smith should be a lesson to all of us that the state
cannot and will not protect us from maniacs. Safety and security can
only be achieved when individuals take responsibility for themselves.

Police are not really there “to protect and to serve.” They are there
to take reports and maintain files. And even that mission seems
overwhelming to them at times.

The Illinois State Police issued Smith a firearm owner’s ID card just
three weeks ago. Why? If he had been turned down for a gun purchase, how
could he be issued a firearm owner’s ID by a police agency?

Well, the state police admit it was done because of clerical errors
— among them, his middle initial had been listed incorrectly.

What this case points out so clearly is that all the police power and
all the laws in the world will not make you, your family and your
neighbors safe. Let’s face it. The only thing that can offer you some
protection is a well-regulated trigger finger and a good aim.

Why can’t Americans see the obvious? Why don’t they understand what
our founders saw so clearly more than 200 years ago? The government, no
matter how benign it may seem, is not your friend. It does not have your
best interests in mind. Left to its own devices and unchecked by a
vigilant population, governments will always seek more and more power.

Ultimately the only real check on that trend toward authoritarianism
and totalitarianism is a well-armed, well-disciplined, well-informed
citizenry. Well-armed, well-disciplined, well informed. Does that sound
like America as it approaches the new millennium? God help us.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.