Fixing things

Ron White famously said "You can't fix stupid".  And he is right.  As I have mentioned previously, ignorance is correctable, stupid is forever.  You can't fix psychosis, either. Sometimes - and only sometimes - psychosis can be sufficiently medicated to moderate it.  Or perhaps it can be isolated in a facility.  Unfortunately too often it is undetected until it manifests itself in tragic fashion.

Thus psychosis was revealed in Las Vegas.  I don't use the word "crazy", that is too flippant, too undefined.  Steve Martin is known as being a "wild and crazy guy" yet he hasn't yet shot into a crowd of festival goers. Paddock was psychotic. Period.  The latest revelation is that he hired a hooker for $6K per night to indulge in violent, kinky sex. And his fantasies included murder and mayhem.  But, hey, it was Las Vegas.  What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas, right?  Not exactly.  The problem is that such behavior, might not seem so extreme for 6 grand a pop.  Some hookers specialize in "unique" behaviors.  B&D, S&M, water sports, dress fetishes are all part of some john's preferences, catered to by specialists.  But what is the difference between "kinky" and "murder"?  There is a fine line between "different" and "psychotic".  But the line is still there.

Immediately the dimocrats came unglued.  Hillary, trying to make herself relevant, chimed in that had he been using a suppressor then the people wouldn't have known they were being shot at.  Please.  As has been stated many times, "it is better to remain silent and thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."  As if anyone had any doubt about that crone.  Of course her similarly lobotomized parrot and former limping mate, Tim Kaine repeated this drivel before he took the time to read a few replies pointing out the simple facts of physics that belied such ignorance.  Even the senate's western simpleton admitted that there was nothing within the law that could have prevented this tragedy.   That doesn't mean that Feinstein won't run next year on a gun control platform. (Note - she is 84.  One of the many youthful dimocrat leaders.)  After all, promoting a failed concept over and over and expecting different results is what they do. 

As I have mentioned previously, the study of history as well as the awareness of failed theories is but one of the liberals' fatal refuges.  As the usual response, liberals are screaming for the confiscation of firearms.  "DO SOMETHING"!  Is their cry.  The same ones who have branded DJT the next Hitler wants to take away the people's power of resistance.  Perhaps they should research the "Prague Spring" or "Tianamen Square" for a comparison.  They haven't stopped to realize that if you take away the people's guns, only the government will have any....

Except the government won't have the only firearms.  Perhaps the only legal ones, but illegal ones work too.  Go to Chicago and find out.  Or Baltimore.  Or Mexico.

It is almost impossible for a normal citizen to legally possess a firearm in Mexico, especially a handgun.  In rural areas it is slightly easier to possess a .22 or shotgun.  Look up "Zeta murders" and "Sinaloa Cartel killings" to see how peaceful Mexico is today.  The books "The Power of The Dog" and "The Cartel" by Don Winslow provide an excellent review of the history of the Mexican/US drug condition.  Guns are very strictly controlled in Mexico, just like Chicago, DC and Baltimore.  So are drugs, just like in Chicago, DC and Baltimore.  HEY!  Here is a thought for the liberals - make guns, drugs and murder illegal. Problem solved!  Uh....what?  Oh.....never mind. 

Scott Adams (Dilbert) has a relevant position on such laws - since laws don't actually prevent crime, they simply discourage it so they don't work for the truly determined.  Sort of like taking away cars from those who don't drive drunk.  Do you have any idea how many repeat offenders of drunk driving there are?  How many of them drive without a license?

There is a reason for the Second Amendment.  It was for the people to have as close to the same power of resistance that a rogue government might have to impose tyranny.  The founders realize that even with all the restrictions they built into the Constitutions there might come a time when a charismatic leader might wrest control from the observing populace.  And then it would be necessary to repeat 1776.  Again, this is where a study of history is relevant.  Madison referred to a "well regulated militia".  Actually, he got that from George Washington.  At that time a "well regulated militia" described a condition where every capable male was expected to own at least one firearm (usually a rifle,) to also posses powder and ball (bullets) and to be able to operate all proficiently.  Thus they could respond to the call of the governor (NOT a federal government) to form a militia (the notion of a standing army at this time was abhorrent to them) in order to resist invasion or civil unrest.  There were, after all, some Tory sympathizers yet wishing for the British to return.  (See the War of 1812 for the rest of that story.) 

The Second Amendment protects ALL of the other amendments.  There has already been a call to eliminate the Second.  Well, while you're at it, why not the Fourth?  Or Fifth?  Oblama tried to eliminate most of the First.  Who needs the Constitution anyway?  Let's become a real Democracy rather than a republic.  You know, like Greece? Or like Venezuela used to be. Or any of the countless other failed democracies through history. 

The United States has produced the greatest source of freedom, support, opportunity, protection and equality for the greatest number of people around the world than any other country in history.  Before recommending that we screw that up, study some history.

The US Constitution isn't broken.  It doesn't need to be fixed.

ciao

the Snark