Lanterns: Second Amendment Cake – Part One

Blog

Second Amendment Cake – Part One

I think we all likely recognize the old saying, “You can’t have your cake and eat it too.” The suggestion, of course, is that we can’t have something and enjoy it at the same time. I know this is not news to you, but Progressives will tell you that not only can’t you eat the cake, it’s not even yours!  You may think it is, but for your own good, and that of society, they must take it. 

A good friend shared something on social media I just had to use. The original author is unknown or I would certainly give them credit. The story goes like this:

“I hear a lot about “compromise” from your camp … except, it’s not a compromise.

Let’s say I have this cake. It is a very nice cake, with “GUN RIGHTS” written across the top in lovely floral icing. Along you come and say, “Give me that cake.”

I say, “No, it’s my cake.”

You say, “Let’s compromise. Give me half.”

I respond by asking what I get out of this compromise, and you reply that I get to keep half of my cake.

Okay, we compromise. Let us call this compromise The National Firearms Act of 1934.

There I am with my half of the cake, and you walk back up and say, “Give me that cake.”

I say, “No, it’s my cake.”

You say, “Let’s compromise.

What do I get out of this compromise? Why, I get to keep half of what’s left of the cake I already own.

So, we have your compromise — let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 — and I’m left holding what is now just a quarter of my cake.
I’m sitting in the corner with my quarter piece of cake, and here you come again.

You want my cake. Again.

This time you take several bites — we’ll call this compromise the Clinton Executive Orders — and I’m left with about a tenth of what has always been MY CAKE and you’ve got nine-tenths of it.

Then we compromised with the Lautenberg Act (nibble, nibble), the HUD/Smith and Wesson agreement (nibble, nibble), the Brady Law (NOM NOM NOM), and the School Safety and Law Enforcement Improvement Act.

I’m left holding crumbs of what was once a large and satisfying cake, and you’re standing there with most of MY CAKE, making anime eyes and whining about being “reasonable,” and wondering “why we won’t compromise.”

I’m done with being reasonable, and I’m done with compromise. Nothing about gun control in this country has ever been “reasonable” nor a genuine “compromise.”

It’s interesting to note the comment recently from one of the most ardent anti-gun politicians, Dianne Feinstein. On CBS Face The Nation she was asked by John Dickerson whether any law could have prevented the Las Vegas massacre. “No. He passed background checks registering for handguns and other weapons on multiple occasions.”

Yet, she is pressing for a ban on “bump stocks.”  “Regulations aren’t going to do it. We need a law,” she said. “It can’t be changed by another president. Right now we’re seeing one president change actions of a president that came before him. And that would happen in this area. And I would hope that Americans will step up and say ‘Enough is enough. Congress, do something.’ ”

Never mind that bump stocks were reviewed and found compliant with regulations and law under the Obama administration. Also never mind that she just told us that safety or lives have nothing to do with her actions. But I digress.

According to Pew Research, only 20% of Americans trust the federal government to do what’s right always or most of the time. That’s one in five. That lack of trust is well founded, yet we are supposed to trust them with our fundamental rights? Perhaps we need to examine the genesis of these rights. Is the 2nd Amendment outdated?

I recently wrote about how progressives Never Let A Crisis Go To Waste, outlining how there are many things that result in far more deaths, yet receive little to no attention. There are no calls for “Congress to do something” or “If we can save just one life it will be all worth it.” It this certainly proof they care nothing about lives; it’s all about control.

Has ANY COMPROMISE ever been one that moved towards the Constitution and Liberty? Has any moratorium or ban EVER worked?

 

I hope you’ll follow this series as we explore not only this right but our rights in general. The 2nd Amendment is not the only right under attack, and this is not a war in and of itself, but a battle in a larger war that has raged since the inception of our republic. The fight will continue until the ultimate failure of our society due to the people’s ignorance and apathy.

Written by Michael Murphy The Voice of Reason

The Voice of Reason

0 Responses

leave a reply


login to reply to thread

Sign Up
Forgot Password