Is taking guns out of the hands of decent Americans the solution? (Nobody that I know of objects to criminals not having guns.) I believe Connecticut does have a right-to-carry law, and perhaps more people need to start exercising that right. Let’s suppose that half, or even a third, of the teachers, administrators, and support personnel at Sandy Hook had been armed; how many children would have died? We don’t know the answer to that question, of course, but had the killer known, beforehand, that he was walking into a defended location, that might have been enough to deter him; how many armies will attack a country with far superior fire power? Now, given the mental instability of Adam Lanza, that may have made no difference to him, but, with a well-armed cadre of staff, somebody could have nailed him before he did near as much damage as occurred. More guns on the scene could have limited the tragedy significantly. The police can’t be everywhere and generally only show up after the terror is over. People are going to have to start protecting themselves, especially given what liberalism has done to morality and decency in American society.
Now, I’m certainly not in favor of giving everybody a gun. Only responsible, decent people, who have proven that they possess the right kind of character and decision-making ability should be allowed to carry, and that only after they have received proper training and scrutiny. A gun is dangerous. But a gun in the hands of the right person could have saved a lot of lives in Newtown and Aurora, and everywhere else these sorts of tragedies are happening.
But the ultimate answer, of course, is to reform the hearts and character of humans so that such things become virtually impossible, morally. After an event like Newtown, liberals always like to mockingly shout, "Why did your God allow such a thing to happen?" Liberals boot God out of the schools, try to ban every mention or visible manifestation of Him and His laws in society, but then want to blame Him when people act in ungodly ways. God has told humans exactly how we should act—"Thou shalt not kill" (not "Thou shalt ban anything where one human can harm another"). Why do we fault Him when we ignore what He says?
Noah Webster, great early American, said "Education is useless without the Bible." How many more people, and children, are going to have to die at the hands of maniacs before we return to that truth?
Maybe they did occur, but I don’t recall tragedies like Newtown happening when I was growing up and "Father Knows Best" was a popular television program and theme for guiding culture and society. Liberalism and feminism are hell-bent on destroying the American family; liberals are even trying to change the definition of "family" so that "two mommies" or "two daddies" is equivalent to what God established. And then we wonder why so many youth have screwed-up minds. They have no idea what is right or wrong, because liberals don’t, either! They make it up as they go along! The family is the foundation and strength of any society—nurturing, caring for, and educating the next generation of citizens. Motherhood and fatherhood are the most important responsibilities in any society, but the American family today has been destroyed by a liberalism that wants to exalt the state, and a secular elite who believes it knows better how to raise children than God does, and we end up with dysfunctional young people like Adam Lanza who don’t know the basics of civilized behavior. Giving them pills is not going to solve the problem; giving them God will. Liberals repeat, endlessly, "if he hadn’t had the gun, he couldn’t have done the killing, and all those children would be alive today." That is certainly true. But if Adam Lanza had been a faithful, New Testament Christian, he wouldn’t have done the killing, either. Which is better—take away guns from all people, including responsible citizens, but leave the godless dysfunctional philosophy in place, or creating the kind of moral, virtuous society, built upon the laws of God and Christianity where people respect human life and other people’s rights? I’ll stand with God and Christ any day of the week over liberal politicians. Indeed, the most dangerous person in the world is not someone like Adam Lanza, but is a godless politician with access to weapons and other people’s money. The 20th century provides overwhelming, incontrovertible historical proof of that fact.
As long as liberal philosophy remains in the ascendancy in America, crime and wickedness will wax worse and worse. That means people will need protection—protection against those who cannot discern right and wrong on their own, who have been taught there is no absolute right and wrong, who have been given no moral guidance by their family because that ascendant philosophy wants to destroy the family and has indeed gone a long way in doing so. Protection can be found in many ways, but, to rephrase someone (Mao Zedong) who certainly knew a lot about defending himself, "protection comes out the barrel of a gun." Ultimately, bottom line, when all is said and done, my body is mine, my property, and it’s up to me to protect it. I’m certainly not going to trust Barack Obama or Chuck Schumer to do it. Why would I trust thieves and liars to defend my life?
**********
"A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."--Theodore Roosevelt. Before we take the rifles out of the hands of decent, God-fearing Americans, let’s take the vote out of the hands of godless, immoral miscreants who elect liberal politicians.