At a recent televised “town hall” meeting, Barack Obama ridiculed those who think he may have nefarious purposes in his campaign against private gun ownership. “The United States was born suspicious of some distant authority,” Obama said condescendingly. Yes, it certainly was, and for good reason. Our Founding Fathers were suspicious that someone was trying to take away their self-government, and they were right. They didn’t let it happen.
Now, why might the American people suspect that Barack Obama and his political cohorts are out to disarm them and render them ripe for oppression? Well, for one thing, in his televised announcement of his new decrees, Obama told a blatant lie. He said a convicted felon could buy a gun via the internet with no background check. This is flatly false. No one can do that. Internet guns sales always have to go through a local Federal Firearms License holder, and they do require a background check. Saying the contrary could not have been an honest mistake on Obama’s part. He and his staff, having just carefully prepared an address on changing the nation’s gun law, could not conceivably have been ignorant of what the law actually is. If you catch someone telling you a bald-faced lie, you ought to be suspicious about what that person is up to.
Second, none of the measures Obama recently announced would have prevented a single one of the crimes over which he shed his now-famous phony tears. A few well placed concealed-carrying citizens might have done something to halt those atrocities, but nothing in Obama’s new decrees would have done a bit of good, and it’s unlikely his new policies would be any hindrance to future crimes either. If a person’s actions obviously can’t possibly accomplish his announced purposes, we would be wise to suspect that person plans some further actions that might be much more aggressive. What we’re seeing right now is just the first step.
Third, Obama and his cohorts on the Left are constantly applauding Australia’s gun confiscation and the equally draconian guns laws in Britain. You can read about such encomiums here, here, here, and here. Now, if he’s singing the praises of gun confiscation in Australia and holding up that country’s action as an example to be emulated by the United States, what do you suppose he wants to do here? Do you think we ought to be suspicious of him?
Obama and his political allies are probably not going to attempt confiscation tomorrow or the next day. It will take time–though not as much time as we might wish–and it will likely be a step-by-step process. First, gun ownership needs to be restricted, and people need to be brought to accept more and more infringements of their rights. The number of gun owners needs to be reduced through various steps that will make gun ownership more expensive and difficult and less socially acceptable. If the American people can be brought to accept a president simply legislating by decree in such a way as to infringe the right to keep and bear arms, that in itself will be a big first step toward the complete disarming of the American people. That’s a sobering thought, when you consider what history shows us always happens to a nation within a generation after the disarming of its citizens.
Yes, America was born suspicious, and for that we should be thankful. Our Founding Fathers believed in resisting the first encroachments of tyranny. That’s how they kept their freedom. They passed down to us a heritage of liberty and of careful scrutiny of any efforts to impose lawless government power over the citizen. If we’re going to keep the freedom they bequeathed us, we’re going to have to be very watchful. And suspicious.