08/23/2006: Having given this issue serious thought, that is the unbearable conclusion: people who wish to ban guns are supportive of genocide.
Some readers will ridicule that statement, and even suggest that I am being unnecessarily inflammatory. After all, most anti-gunners I know are of the more pacifist persuasion.
But the fact remains, they are supporting genocide because they oppose the rights of citizens to protect themselves from government tyranny.
The right to keep and bear arms is not about a national guard, nor is it about hunting deer or elk or ducks, nor is it about having marksmanship contests, nor is it about ballistic masturbation at the gun range.
I defy anyone to show me a historical case in which the victims of genocide were armed. Jews in Nazi Germany were disarmed. Ukranians who perished under Stalin were unarmed. Cambodians who fell to the Khmer Rouge–a quarter of the population–were unarmed. The millions of Chinese who died under Mao’s reign of terror were unarmed.
Fact is, genocide is a crime by government against citizens. If citizens are not allowed to arm themselves, then they are unable to defend themselves against such tyranny.
Given that a major purpose of the United Nations was to help prevent genocide, it strikes me as quite deplorable that the U.N. is fixated on taking guns away from citizens.
By denying citizens the right to protect themselves, gun-grabbers are unwitting supporters of genocide, as the latter is merely the telos of such misguided policy.