.

Invent a Cause, Make a Law, Create Terror

Central planning is a poor substitute for natural law

As a Chicago born and raised teenager in the mid-1950s, I, at the age of 14, legally purchased a 12 ga. shotgun without ID and but a simple phone call to ascertain parental consent. There was no requirement for registration. The only data exchanged was my contact information documented on the shopkeeper's bill of sale.

In that same era, public schools had open campuses, unlocked doors and neither security concerns nor a need for security procedures -- other than the routine fire drills and the occasional under-the-desk nuclear attack drill.

Firearms and ammunition could be legally (and were routinely) carried inside the passenger compartment of autos and trucks.

In 1961 there were 158.1 violent crimes recorded per 100K people; in 1991 there were 758.1 violent crimes recorded per 100K people (see FBI crime stats).

Today, Chicago has among the most restrictive handgun ownership laws in the nation, yet this summer's Southside shooting rampages continue at a fever pitch.

Since the outset of the Chicago handgun ban, the percentage of Chicago murders committed with handguns has averaged about 40% higher than it was before the law took effect.

There is no law that will ever force a person with bad intentions to voluntarily give up their illegally obtained and/or unregistered firearm(s). 

The USA does not have a gun problem, it has a mental health problem; a prescription drug problem; an illegal drug problem; a latch-key kids problem; a day-care abuse problem; a public school abuse problem; a one parent family problem; a foster children problem; a violence in media problem...all of which fall under the aegis of the catch-all: a critical and consequential absence of morality problem.

America has a problem with anger and hate; and there is no legislative body that can create a law to fix this pharmacologically and sociologically induced psychosis.

Public schools are, by law, "gun free zones."

Is it possible that Kleibold, Harris and Lanza considered that fact as they planned their evil deeds?

I have an idea: How about taking away from every legislator or individual (who voted for or supports gun control) their armed security detail, all the firearms from their homes, and then stick a sign on the front door identifying their home as a "gun free zone."

What, then, is the diametrically opposite difference between the America of the 1950s -- and that of today?

The answer: Progressivism.

Why? Because those whose ideas emanated from elite academia and which evolved into political correctness -- have managed to destroy the peoples’ connection and adherence to the concept(s) of natural law.

Example: Displays featuring the Ten Commandments and The Golden Rule were depicted as murals on the staircase landings of Skokie, Illinois’ Sharp Corner Elementary (public) School that I attended as a 5th and 6th grader; or, while in 7th grade at Jamieson Public School in Chicago, the teacher leading us in prayer for our classmate, Jimmy Schmidt, who was dying of cervical cancer -- are now prohibited by judicial (albeit, unconstitutional) fiat.

Progressives also reject the idea that every responsible person has the natural right to self defense.

Consider this:

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." ~~ George Washington

People who are predisposed to the concepts of social engineering are, ironically, the least qualified to enact the panacea of every progressive: “change.” What they do have is an overabundance of media clout; which adds more than a modicum of misguided credibility to their nefarious schemes -- many of which have been cited above.

America does not have a gun problem. America has a problem with a strong central government that has seen fit to disconnect the people from the morality based concepts found in natural law.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Craig Maxwell December 22, 2012 at 07:53 PM
Thanks, Vince. Along with a fascinating philosophical/historical overview of this school of thought, the latest incarnation of the intellectual muddle known as progressivism, Barack Obama, is brilliantly analysed and discussed by Charles Kesler in the following book: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444554704577641952887524734.html A must read for anyone wishing to understand Obama's bloated brain.
Scott H. Kidwell December 22, 2012 at 11:21 PM
British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher famously said in a radio interview that the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money to spend. This has been formalized as the Thatcher Line: the point at which the burden of government begins to overwhelm the ability of the private sector to pay for it.
Saul Rubinowitz December 23, 2012 at 07:48 AM
OKAY, Okay. There are sooo many things here I do not know where to begin........First of all, the liberties teeth quotation is not and cannot be attriibuted to Washington, look it up, even Rush Limbaighs fact checker could have caught that one. Secondly no one can argue that we should have unfettered access to firearms, (a handguns concession machine comes to mind), the argument that if everyone had guns there would be less crime is at best a red herring. (Set by the NRA to increase gun ownership, speaking of a nefarious scheme!) Finally I would agree that if America followed concepts of Natural Law we would be in a better position. However our notion of Morality and Justice has been skewered by the Concepts of "Positive Law' or, for those on the back bench, " Man made laws" (Re: The Ten Commandments.) In closing I truely feel and I am not alone, that the real problem with America and the on you missed OP is too Many Grumpy White Dudes, with too much time on their hands, who feel that if it was just the way it was back in the 1950's all would be well with the world. It is short sighted obtuse thinking, that sells Ad time on AM radio but solves nothing. Time moves Forward, things change, get out of the way. BTW, I can't leave with out asking; Where is the Elite Acedemia and how is influencing and controlling us? Robert Bork at Yale, John Roberts at Harvard or how about Bill Frist at Princeton? Elite Academia, what a hoot!!
Vincent Wallgren, Jr. December 23, 2012 at 05:41 PM
Thank you, Saul, for reinforcing my point(s). By your use of a typical progressive platitude ("Time moves Forward, things change, get out of the way."), you seem to infer that—regardless the outcome—only progressives are qualified to determine what constitutes "change." That is exactly why I use the term "elite academia;" for they consist of nameless PhDs whose influence over what is taught to all America's young is maifest; and, in continuation of that same theme, have also accrued inordinate sway over our nation's legislative process. Yes, Saul, I am an angry old white guy; but not because I am old or white. I am angry because of the changes that have produced the Columbines and Sandy Hooks. I am angry because of the changes to the construct of human interaction that have produced the morbid behavioral outcomes that gave us those terrible tragedies. You see, Saul, as a kindergardener, I walked to school by myself; for the very simple reason that there was nothing to fear. Yes, I view the 40s and 50s as special times because they were happy, replete with good things, and totally devoid of anything (except an atomic bomb or an angry parent) that would make the most innocent among us fearful. I sincerely hope you don't see the Ten Commandments as "positive law." Really? Please expound. In one of these links is the Washington quote -- among many others. http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndfqu.html http://cap-n-ball.com/fathers.htm
Things I Learned December 23, 2012 at 08:31 PM
(clown nose off) The quote is fake. Saul just can't dispute the other facts you present. (clown nose on)
Vincent Wallgren, Jr. December 24, 2012 at 12:37 AM
My apologies to all for the phony Washington quote (thanks TIL). Let's try this one: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States." --Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, 1787
Saul Rubinowitz December 24, 2012 at 04:33 AM
Mr. Wallgren, I wiill concede that there are certainly problems with the breakdown of the family unit, which leads to day care abuse, which leads to problems in school, which follows a disaffected youth, which can lead to kids using violence as a solution to problem. Daniel Patrick Moynihan called this out over 40 years ago. However I believe it is false logic to assume that it is a breakdown in Morality. I feel it is a lack of coping an dproblem solving skills that CAN be gained thru a secure family unit of whatever its makeup. While they sell this morality every weekend at churches such as Skyline (As long as your check doesn't bounce), I feel that what we are harvesting now is what Sen. Moynihan said we were sowing with the breakdown of a two parent household (Whatever gender). Now, as for the Elite Academia. My wife is a PHD cadidate at USD and one of our good friends is a Tenured Professor at SDSU and one thing I can truely say is that the conversations at social gatherings with people from both institutions is aboslutely no different than from when I tended bar at a CPO club or Irish Pub back east. It takes all kinds and they are all there, whether they are a retired E8, an Irish Blaggard or a Engineering Professor. There is no, despite what Sean HJannity says a strangle hold on progressive thought in Academic institutions. Although the more eloquent and most heard tend to be better educated, (but not necessarily college degreed). Even Bill O'Reilly went to Harvard.
Saul Rubinowitz December 24, 2012 at 04:34 AM
Part Two:It is the best of times. While we can all wax nostalgic on the past, I have no doubt that this is truely the time of my childrens life! The don't walk to school, but they don't have to worry about Polio, contaminated drinking water and food, getting thrown thru the windshiled of a car 'cause it has no seatbelts, the Red Menace or Richard Nixon! Times were great in the 70's and 80's when I was growing up and they are even more awesome now that my kids are in Grammar school. Put life in perspective Vincent, my Grandparent and parents paid taxes, complained about them. There were hobos and welfar queens, drunks and punks when I was growing up. But Time Marches Forward, come along for the ride or once again, geet out of the way.
Things I Learned December 24, 2012 at 04:53 AM
You should not stand athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.
Batman December 24, 2012 at 06:42 AM
Mr Rubinowitz, you are a verbose individual, as most academics are. Keep in mind the automobile, the airplane, the lightbulb and the cure for polio were all invented right her in capitalist America by Americans. Bible thumping, gun toting America. My favorite hero of history, Thomas Edison, was written off as a lost cause by his school teachers and home schooled by his mother. He then provided himself his own secondary education. And what university at that time was offering "light bulb inventing 205" anyway? The colleges and universities are not the source of knowledge in our world, they are simply warehouses of knowledge, and sometimes poorly stocked at that. Radio personality Rush Limbaugh likes to use the phrase "talent on loan from God". He's not joking! Do you really think he gets his talent from himself? My brother in law has a PHD from UCSD. ?????????????. Really, he does. So Mr Rubinowitz, you don't impress me with your bullshit. The "Man Upstairs" is bigger than both of us, and I'm sure he's getting fed up with the degredation of morality he sees around here. Sooner or later he's going to blow his stack. You may want to stand aside when that train comes through.
Things I Learned December 24, 2012 at 06:47 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht7mxF9XZiA
Saul Rubinowitz December 24, 2012 at 09:51 AM
Well.....I am not in academia. Sorry. I work for a living. My point wasn't that all knowledge comes from book learning, it was that in my experience there are people of different opinions, both conservative and progressive, no matter their background. As for those industries you mentioned, all of them are heavily subsidized by your tax dollars, even good old Mr Edison, who founded GE. Mr Salk however was much more magnanimous, than all the others, his research was funded by non profit and he did not patent his vaccine, as it was for humanity. As for the last little bit, I don't know where the rage came from, but, My Goddess is Menrfa, (Look her up) she rocks in so many ways and is soooo much better than any other. There is no smiting or judgement allowed and When you accept her as your personal pal, you get to watch the early NFL games on Sunday AND keep 10% of your net income! Betcha Garlow and McPherson wouldn't stay in business long if they offered that deal!
Jimmy Sanders December 24, 2012 at 02:50 PM
Anything your God can do my God can do better, My God can do anything better than your God, No She can't Yes She can No She can't Yes She can, Yea She can, Yes She can!
Kevin George December 27, 2012 at 06:04 PM
In 1966 Charles Whitman killed 14 people, with a scoped bolt action rifle and a shotgun in Austin Texas. The AR 15 was available to the public in 1963. If the guns are the problem, why suddenly the huge increase in mass murder by gun? There has been no change in the technology for fifty years, leaving only one other possible explanation. The operators. Thanks Vince, excellent job.
Vincent Wallgren, Jr. December 27, 2012 at 06:05 PM
Mr. Rubinowitz: These are the best of times? Really? Then again, your refusal to acknowledge the true nature of America's problems is not surprising; for the canard of "waxing nostalgic" (among other like phrases) is typical of the progressive sound bites offered in defense of the indefensible. I would submit, Sir, that progressivism is hypocrisy on steroids. On the one hand is the hue and cry for progressive ideals; while on the other hand is a refusal to acknowledge the outcomes of these most ineffectual cradle to grave initiatives. To, when it suits political objectives, refuse to accept failure is a question of morality. To glibly cast aside the degenerative and regressive state of our humanity is inhuman. To reduce the concept of progress to the confines of advances in science and technology is both shallow and self serving. In the interest of full disclosure, I find the neoconservatives equally culpable; for they have—behind closed doors—reached innumerable quid pro quo accords with their progressive counterparts; while, for the sake of political expediency, engendered and sold to an uninformed electorate these abhorrently nefarious schemes -- yet another prime example that serves to underscore the complete absence of morality in our so-called process of governance.
Craig Maxwell December 27, 2012 at 06:48 PM
"Nobody has any business to use the word “progress” unless he has a definite creed and a cast-iron code of morals. Nobody can be progressive without being doctrinal; I might almost say that nobody can be progressive without being infallible at any rate, without believing in some infallibility. For progress by its very name indicates a direction; and the moment we are in the least doubtful about the direction, we become in the same degree doubtful about the progress. Never perhaps since the beginning of the world has there been an age that had less right to use the word “progress” than we. ...as enunciated today, 'progress' is simply a comparative of which we have not settled the superlative." --G.K. Chesterton
Vincent Wallgren, Jr. December 27, 2012 at 08:20 PM
Right on, Craig!
dragonslayer December 28, 2012 at 04:34 PM
Tell that to African Americans who have clearly seen progress in a superlative sense. To argue otherwise is to argue that segregation and Jim Crow were the pinnacle of morality. Tell that to women whose role in modern day society has grown stronger to their benefit. Tell that to gay Americans who can finally live on an equal public basis regardless of the bigotry of folks like you who claim an absolute stranglehold on morality. You better start swimmin' or you'll sink like a stone ...
Batman December 28, 2012 at 04:44 PM
No matter how much "African Americans" steal they are still poor, and unhappy. Women have the "freedom" to go to work, so the chickenhawks in the daycare centers can molest,,, excuse me, raise their children for them. Gays have the freedom to sodomize each other, so they can die from an incurable disease. My how far we've come!
dragonslayer December 28, 2012 at 04:52 PM
I rest my case Batman.
Vincent Wallgren, Jr. December 28, 2012 at 05:30 PM
dragonslayer: The tag line of this blog is: "Central planning is a poor substitute for natural law." The events you cited were all FORCED upon government due to the activism of people who sought righteous outcomes. Such activities I see as playing an important part in the march toward individual liberty. Problems, however, arise when the central planners of big government seize upon opportunities to further expand the scope of their legislatively restricted powers. To believe that central planning has improved the life of poor (race or gender notwithstanding) people is terribly shortsighted; for the number of people dependent upon public assistance is ever growing. That, my friend, is far more regressive than could ever be considered progressive. Every human being should have the inalienable right to make the choices they believe will bring them happiness; with the only caveat being: do no harm to another person or their property. Sadly, the aforementioned expansion of government has led to innumerable restrictions upon natural human action; leading to the inevitable consequences of kids murdering kids, babies having babies and the near destruction of the nuclear family.
dragonslayer December 28, 2012 at 06:13 PM
The fathers of our children have been predicting our economic and moral demise for generations now and each generation has managed to promulgate their terms of their new society with the resultant successes and failures. Rome has not fallen. Poverty, murder and the birth of babies by young women are hardley the sole blame of modern American government. I fear a military state. I fear warrantless wire taps, The Patriot Act, rendition and assasination of US citizens by their own government. I fear unjustified wars. I fear the private banking sector which just recently almost destroyed us and was only saved by the same government you so vehemently crticize. I don't fear unemployment insurance, social security, medicare nor gun control when maniacs are walking the streets with weapons that should be rightly restricted to the military.
Craig Maxwell December 28, 2012 at 06:30 PM
(But Rome did fall.)
Vincent Wallgren, Jr. December 28, 2012 at 08:20 PM
I wholly agree with your stated fears (wire taps, Patriot Act, etc.). I disagree that government saved the nation from economic collapse. Through TARP and QE ad infinitum, the investment banking community has been greatly enriched to cover their poor business decisions; while the dollars advanced to "the too big to fail" are now, to a large degree, added to the national debt; making interest on the national debt the fourth (after DOD, medicare, medicaid) highest federal budget line item. To say that AIG would have failed is, at best, a remote possibility. Had they filed for a Chapter 11 reorganization, chances are they would have been able to liquidate a large portion of their debt -- as opposed to saddling the taxpayers with an even darker future economic legacy. You see, dragonslayer, the government is we, the people. So until such time as we can put a screeching halt to the degenerative metamorphosis—the symptoms of which that have been herewith documented—of our humanity, we will NEVER be able to correct the problems both you and I have cited; for those that eventually go into government service will come from the very same gene pool that has shown a clear disdain for the traditional values found in natural law.
dragonslayer December 28, 2012 at 08:48 PM
There we go. Proof positive that we will do the same.
Craig Maxwell December 28, 2012 at 08:56 PM
Exsqueeze me? Baking powder?
Vincent Wallgren, Jr. December 29, 2012 at 02:32 AM
dragonslayer: There we go. Proof positive that we will do the same. Not quite sure what that means, ds. Please explain. Thanks.
Things I Learned December 29, 2012 at 03:09 AM
I think dragonslayer is saying we should not vehemently criticize the same government that is behind warrantless wire taps, The Patriot Act, rendition and assasination of US citizens by their own government, unjustified wars, and saving the private banking sector which just recently almost destroyed us because everything will be ok if only the government is allowed to have guns not the governed Rome didn't fall in a day. ;-)
Craig Maxwell December 29, 2012 at 06:27 PM
(What's the price of tea in China?)

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something