Leaders like Prime Minister Trudeau don’t care about the individual. What they care about are the “optics”, the polls, and any constinuencies that keep them in office. He’s not different than leaders in the US or other countries.
Canada has a low population for the vast amount of land. Still, the majority of their population borders the US, because going much further north, is like living in the outskirts of the tundra.
What does that have to do with tyranny and the misuse of guns and senseless violence. Plenty.
If you’re an objective person that does their research, you will note that violence most often increases when people are living closer together. Living on top of one another doesn’t bring out the best in some of us. As a matter of fact, violent acts are more frequent among those who know each other, rather than random strangers.
Guns are “the great equalizer.” Although firearms have been around before the 13th century, they really didn’t come into their own until the 16th century. Governments and tyrants were mostly the ones using them. Governments by the 18th century were the principal purchasers and users. They found a firearm, even in the hands of lowly commoners could take down a knight from a safe distance.
Then something happened in the late 18th century which altered a global view by the people who occupy a country. The United States emerged and with it a document that we now take for granted. The document first stated the purpose of forming the government and defined, that a government wasn’t the most important reason for people to exist.
What monarchies, oligarchies, theocracies, and tyranny of all types were previously doing to their own, was exercising what ever level of control and plunder they desired. The US Constitution turned the whole idea of nation state on its ear. It was not a nation designed to support the elite, but the individual.
So how does that apply today? There has always been a segment of population which willingly robs, plunders, rapes, imprisons, and murders people. Sometimes those who rose to power were part of that group. They often rose to power through clever manipulation or inheritance. Some rose to power through the process of a ballot box. What they all have in common were the methods of holding on to that power. Intimidation, sanctimonious decrees, perversion of courts, or sometimes the power of the gun.
The US Constitution recognized for the first time, individual liberties supercede the powers of national sovereignty, and imperial control. This was limited of course to the basic idea, you can flail your hands and mouth, even in irrational behavior, but when you attempt to harm, primarily physically, and in some cases libelous fashion, then it’s not OK. The central idea was, do no harm. That’s an overly simplistic explanation to make a broader point.
Firearms can be legally owned by all “free citizens.” That’s an important distinction, which will be explained later in greater detail. The right to freedom of the press, free speech were at the top of the list. Next came the right to own and use firearms. Closely followed by the limits of government, and courts for legal actions.
The framers understood what they set in motion. They all hoped that further violence would not be necessary in order to protect liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Nevertheless the second amendment in the constitution was there, not only for the common citizen to protect themselves from the criminals and mentally harmful, it was there to protect the people from the tyranny of a centralized, unresponsive, poweful, elitist, and corrupted government.
Here we are in the 21st century. We’re still arguing over what the framers meant, and does the Constitution say this or that, and can we modify it to say XYZ__? For the current strategies of leadership today, they’ve hit upon the most attractive and successful ways to accrue more power & control.
First find a reason to have the people willingly hand over their power. This strategy is most successful under times of threat ( national security ). Safety of of all types fall into this category. If the government leaders can point toward a common threat, they announce, they have a cure.
Actually two. First, they want us to surrender more of our liberty. Individual freedom gets in the way of the powerful. Next, taxation. From the times of Robinhood and the overreaching of the elite before and after, legal confiscation of the time and production of the people have been rationalized, for the common public good.
We’re seeing, year by year the changes in centralized power. Today, we’re debating the rights of individuals to step forward into their work, to gather at worship services, even if it’s only in cars. There’s quite a number of us that say, wait until the government tells us it’s OK to resume our normal lives, while others are saying, government you’ve gone too far in your authority.
Where do firearms fit in? And wouldn’t we all be better without them.
Let’s go back to the Constitution as it was originally written. The ruling upheld by the courts all the way into the 20th century, only the free man can own and use a firearm. There’s irony and a history lesson in that statement. It was originally written and enforced to make sure slaves couldn’t own a firearm. The powerful land owners wanted dominant control, so they kept the firearms out of the hands of the indentured servant and slave.
- We are only free when we have the right to express our thoughts in public.
- We are only free when we can protect ourselves from criminals inside and outside of government.
- We are only free when our courts obey the rules themselves, and protect the rights of individuals equitably and passionately.
- We are only free when elected and appointed leaders obey the same laws as everyone. They must not be allowed to be thought of as special, consecrated, annointed, and recognize they’re in office to serve us, the people.
Be cautious of the person(s) who want you to give up more of your freedom for the promise of security. Sooner or later you will have neither.