Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Response to Ms. Karvunidis

She wrote the follwing reacting to the Ohio school shooting.  And I just couldn't let it go unchallenged...  Read away!

Ohio school shooting: Time to ban handguns, guys

Ms. Karvunidis,

I would like to thank you for sharing your feelings about the latest horror caused by guns.  I too am horrified by the actions of another sick or wicked child in men’s clothing.

Your vision of a gun free world is hard to grasp.  How do you propose to rid the US of 2-3 million guns?  The UN?  They are working on a small arms treaty to ban private ownership of guns on a worldwide basis.  It’s destined to fail even if passed.  Again, how do you rid the world of guns?  I would feel safe in estimating that there are far more than 1,000,000,000 guns in existence across the globe.  How do you suppose they are planning on getting their hands on all those weapons?

If you had a plan, and a realistic one at that, then I might actually listen to you.  Since all you did is react from your feelings rather than using logic to take this issue apart, you really aren’t in a position to intelligently discuss the issue of “gun” violence.  But, in a sense of friendliness, let me lay out a few things you might want to think about and apply some logic to.

1. You cannot find a single instance of a firearm loading itself and willfully killing someone without a human hand controlling it.  This is the old saying, “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.”  That psycho kid loaded the gun and he pulled the trigger.  He also willfully got a gun he shouldn’t have had access to.  And he chose to use it to kill other humans.  The gun made no decisions, had no voice and performed no independent actions in this event.

2. You have heard it before but here it is again, “If you take the guns from the law abiding, the criminals will still have guns.”  Criminals are criminals BECAUSE they will break laws.  Any laws.  Even laws banning guns on school property.  And those laws banning minors from possession of firearms.  And laws making it illegal to kill other humans.  They will even create guns out of pipe and wood if none exist due to a “successful” world-wide gun ban.

3. And this is the most important fact in my book, by Natural Law (look it up) I have a Right to protect my self and my family from anyone bent on doing them harm.  The Bill of Rights (look it up) codifies and protects my preexisting Right to protect myself and my family with violence if necessary.  Today that is done through the lawful use of firearms.  I don’t hunt.  I don’t shoot for sport.  I carry a gun every day because of kids like this psycho.

I do own a couple of those billion guns and if no one else had one, and that fact could be proven to me, I would still keep mine.  Gun beats bat.  Gun beats knife.  Gun beats mob.  I plan on keeping mine.

So, with that said, let’s say you and your ilk manage to get a nationwide gun ban in effect.  How do you plan on getting those guns?  Let me tell you now, I am unwilling to walk to the local police department and surrender my firearms.  Will you send your kids or your husband to get my guns?  Not likely, that would be dangerous.  Will you bravely come and ask for them?  Nope.  You will send the police.  To force me.  And if I resist they should kill me?  Of course.  Oh you sweet and glossy idiot.  You are touching something very dangerous here and I don’t think you grasp the import of your foolish words.

Your best bet is getting some of your teachers armed to protect your kids.  That is a far better solution to school shootings than starting a huge war on the streets of your nation with your attempt to get the guns away from the wicked and insane. 

If having guns in the hands of the crazy among us is the problem, then the issue to deal with needs to be the effective and viable treatment of the insane.  If the wicked are using guns to harm people, then the wicked must be opposed by equal force and removed from society, either to jail or the morgue.

It is just that simple.  Not perfect but simple.

Yours in Freedom,
Mark Borgeson

Kennewick, Washington

1 comment:

  1. Sir,

    I read your comment on "High Gloss and Sauce" - I wanted to give you (pardon the pun) more ammo to your arsenal.

    When Admiral Yamamoto planned the attack on Pearl Harbor other factors were in play. At one point the idea was floated of landing Japanese troops on the U.S. mainland. Even if they lost, which was unthinkable, of course, by the time they DID lose (if they did) the Japanese would have a stranglehold over the Pacific. Had they invaded Hawaii, they could have leveraged the West Coast and Hawaii for a U.S. concession for a Japanese equivalent of a Monroe Doctrine - U.S. stay out of the "East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere".

    Admiral Yamamoto had studied at Harvard in the 30's, living in America. He had seen American ideals on "fair play" and our gun heritage. It's how he knew America would be infuriated by the surprise attack, but also why he counseled the Japanese high command against an invasion of the United States.

    He told them that invading the U.S. would be a disaster because "Behind every tree and blade of grass would be an American with a gun"

    So - in response to Ms. Karvunidis : In a time of Fleet Carriers, machine guns, radar, airplanes, machine guns, radio and cyphers, mortars and artillery, one of the strongest most agressive and militaristic armies of the world did not invade the mainland U.S. PRECISELY because they knew that fighting an armed populace would have been an impossible proposition.

    Additionally, as a member of the U.S. military (I am an NCO in a Cav Scout Sqdn) I can tell you that there is no way the U.S. military would, wholesale, simply "follow orders" and disarm U.S. citizens. We in the military discuss exactly this both in official briefings and around the "water cooler". Were that illegal order given by "Captain Smith", there is a better than even chance that "Captain Smith" would find himself relieved of command and placed under arrest.

    Ms Karvunidis, should also note that in Chicago that the politicians who LOVE gun control carved out a special exception for themselves to that very law. Was that an accident, or a simple realization of reality.

    Ms Karvunidis speaks from ignorance on many subjects. She also spouts liberal theory on any number of subjects. Liberals love theory and constantly want their utopian ideals foisted on others - and even when historical facts and precedent are shown to them they suffer from the mental disconnect of "it just wasn't implemented in the right way" disease.

    So - when 150 million people in the last century die for their utopian dream, that's just an argument, not a moment of clarity.