- Text smaller
- Text bigger
Obama hates guns.
This is a fact. Like every lib, like every socialist would-be dictator, like every arrogant statist who views his fellow human beings’ freedom of action as a threat (rather than a benefit that accrues to all the citizenry), Obama cannot stand the idea that you, armed, might be able to stand up to leftist bullying.
You see, that is what a firearm is. Before guns are “liberty teeth,” before they are a tool for resisting oppression, before they are the linchpin of a free society that defends and protects the other natural rights protected by the Bill of Rights, they are a personal means of standing up for yourself. A gun, like a lever or a hammer, is a force multiplier. Firearms are a labor-magnifying technology that enables the user to apply more force to more people than that user could apply with his bare hands. That’s it. That’s all guns do. They possess neither volition nor morality. By themselves, they are complicated paperweights.
The fear and loathing liberals heap on firearms is largely ignorance, projection of their own weakness and irrational fear … but deep down, it is also a recognition of the gun’s utility as a force multiplier. If you’re a lib desperate to control every waking moment of his fellow human beings’ lives, you absolutely cannot abide the idea of force multiplication. This is because liberals adore violence. Specifically, they adore mob violence. An ideology that subordinates the individual to the collective and the citizen to the state of necessity lauds the power of the mob. Liberals are, after all, only courageous in groups. They are happy to bully any man or woman whom they outnumber and can overpower, but will scream victimization if aggressively opposed by prepared, right-thinking citizens.
Examples of liberal thuggery and hate abound and are as close as the nearest political protest. Our left-leaning media delight in furthering the mythology that conservatives, tea-party members and other libertarians are violent and threatening toward peaceful leftist activists, when of course the exact opposite is true and has been demonstrated time and again. Consider, for example, the beating of conservative Kenneth Gladney.
Want a more material example? Liberals and conservatives used the same location for a protest, but the libs trashed it while the conservatives were more respectful. The left has tried and failed to claim that conservatives and tea-party members have hurled racist epithets and spittle at liberals – but, strangely, in a world rife with wireless phone video cameras, not a single recording of such behavior at a major political event has surfaced. Yet left-wingers screaming abuse, threatening force and biting digits from their enemies are plentiful on video-sharing sites like YouTube. Clearly, such people are uncomfortable with the notion of armed resistance.
Now, Obama has his own firearms problems. His corrupt administration has been running illegal guns into Mexico in an ill-conceived scheme to … well, what they thought they were going to accomplish, other than creating an international incident, isn’t clear. Obama also exceeded his authority by dictating, without congressional input, the reporting of bulk sales of firearms along the Mexico border – a bit of liberal gun-hating authoritarianism the NRA is challenging in court.
So, what is my point? My point is that the libs are creatures of the mob, people who are quick to resort to violence. Most often, when they assault conservatives (and anyone else who gets in their way), they far outnumber their opponents. This is because liberals, like all societal predators and criminals, are lazy cowards. The criminal, like the liberal, chooses only fights he believes he can win (and win easily). He is a creature of opportunity. He sees something he wants – or someone he wishes to silence – and he lashes out if he thinks the odds favor him. Most of the time this will happen when he is in the company of his ideological fellow travelers.
In the self-defense industry, the multiple-attacker situation is as close to a doomsday scenario as such training offers. When you face multiple opponents, even if each individual intends only to punch or kick you (meaning, individually, that your attackers don’t intend to murder you), the chances are very good that you will end up on the ground being stomped or kicked. From here, it is very difficult to defend yourself, and it is very likely you will be beaten to death. This is a function of how the human body works – and how it responds to being stomped from above by more than one person.
If you think a multiple-attacker scenario can’t or won’t happen to you, you’re wrong. You may believe you conduct your life safely and reasonably. You may very earnestly avoid dangerous people and dangerous situations. Violence, however, is often random. It can find you even in those places where you are most comfortable and feel most secure. Just this week, singer Gavin DeGraw was attacked by a group of thugs who chased him into traffic – where he was hit by a taxi. He suffered a broken nose and other injuries, according to reports. Apparently an argument preceded the beating. Such arguments can happen to anyone. DeGraw is not a criminal or someone who travels in the company of society’s recidivists, yet he is now intimately familiar with the nightmare of a mob beating.
As liberals grow increasingly shrill in their hatred and frustration over conservative attempts to thwart their power plays, America’s leftists will resort to violence more frequently and in greater numbers. The rancor over the recent debt-ceiling debate will become a fond memory. Obama and his minions, not to mention a complicit media, were quick to tell us that we may never disagree with liberals – for if we do, America will be punished by foreign bankers. As the rhetoric grows hotter, the fists will fly faster. Blaming the “terrorists” in the tea party for Obama’s failures of leadership will seem tame by comparison.
The mob is coming. Be ready.