Tragic Shooting in Oregon: The Real Issue at Heart
America the beautiful. America the great. Brought to our knees once again in the wake of a tragic loss of life in Oregon. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the students, faculty, and staff at Umpqua Community College.
These tragedies are occurring more and more frequently in the United States, specifically in 2015. Some of the most powerful people in the world have been trying to determine what exactly is causing these incidences. How can we prevent them? How can we stem the tide of innocent life lost? How can we, as a nation, leave a better world for our children?
President Obama was quick to respond, reiterating the rhetoric that this is something that can be cured by increased gun laws and background checks. Stating outright that these events should be politicized. That we, as a collective group of self governing citizens, need to empower our elected officials to push changes to the current laws and regulations that would make “common sense” changes to our current system to prevent these incidences in the future.
In 2012, President Obama’s solution to the tragic Newton shooting and in fact, every shooting since then, has been to tighten gun control regulations and expand background checks. Since then, we have seen regulations expanded in major metropolitan areas. New York, Baltimore, Seattle, Los Angeles, San Diego, Massachusetts, and the list goes on and on.
So far, five of those cities that I have listed have seen an increase in violence over the past twelve months.
Other states and cities to include Chicago and New York City have been under extremely tight and constrictive gun control regulations for decades. How are they fairing these days?
Every day, roughly 99.99% of gun owners commit no crime. As I have outlined in a previous article, law abiding gun owners are actually less likely to commit crimes then police officers.
Every day, hundreds of thousands of armed security personnel guard what this nation deems necessary to protect. Politicians, CEO’s, banks, military bases, government buildings. Why you ask? Simply put, these institutions have higher levels of attacks and the protection serves as a deterrent to criminal activity and provides an immediate response force that is capable of providing protections for those institutions.
Historically, you have seen me call for citizens to protect themselves by carrying a defensive handgun with them at all times (where legally allowed. Although I might not agree with some of the laws, I must still follow them or push to change them.) In the car, at home, at work, shopping, and any other activity where you might find yourself a target of a criminal. I beg of this because the simple fact is that criminals will always commit crimes.
Look at the “war on drugs.” Are we any closer today than we were thirty years ago of eradicating cocaine and heroine in this country? How about prescription drug abuse? Are people still able to get their hands on elicit and controlled substances in this country? Absolutely.
According to a recent fact check by Breitbart, 92% of mass shootings in America since 2009 have occurred in a “gun free zone.” Over nine out of every ten that we hear about, law abiding citizens were not allowed to carry a firearm. They were not allowed to defend themselves. They were not allowed to exercise their Second Amendment right let alone their natural human right to defend their lives and their property.
If this country starts to put our money and our politicians above citizens, children and adults, that are trying to better themselves and get an education, maybe we should pull back and reevaluate our priorities. If we put so much in education and making this country a better place when we leave then when we came into it, why are we not protecting the ones that will make that happen?
The government, over the past half century, has further regulated just about every facet of American life and they have done so under the banner of “public safety.” Unfortunately, many people do not realize that they have failed. I can get a ticket for not buckling my seat belt, which will only harm one person, me, yet they refuse to provide security for our educational institutes where psychotic individuals, who will be able to get firearms even if they can’t pass a background check, are taking advantage of unarmed children and adults that have been stripped of their ability to defend themselves. The responsibility of the government in public safety is to provide officers and courts to prosecute criminal and civil cases and if possible, intervene to prevent crimes. The government was not intended to prevent crimes, they are solely responsible for the greater order and prosecution of crimes.
Permit Holders and the Responsibility of the Citizens
As citizens, and permit holders alike, we have an obligation to our own safety and the safety of our family. The chances are rare that a police officer will be on site of a robbery or criminal situation. If you are at a store or a school and someone points a gun in your face, chances are there is no police officer near by. If you do not have the ability to defend yourself, you will find yourself at the mercy of a psychotic criminal.
Why are so many so blind to the fact that criminals, by nature, commit crimes? As we have seen time and time again, criminals specifically pursue soft targets. Further background checks and regulations are not going to solve anything. The only possible way to stop these senseless killings is to not strip citizens of their right to self defense, rather it should be to allow them the ability to defend their lives with force if need be.
Once again, our thoughts and prayers go out to those involved, and our anger should be pointed at the restriction of our ability to defend ourselves and our loved ones.