William Katz:  Urgent Agenda

HOME      ABOUT      OUR ARCHIVE      CONTACT 

 

 

 

 

PRAVDA SAYS IT – AT 8:42 A.M. ET:  Ordinarily we don't quote stories from Pravda, although I hasten to point out that Pravda isn't the same paper it was when it was run by the old Kremlin boys.   Now Pravda has published a piece that is going viral on the internet.  It is, incredibly, an argument for Americans to protect their right to bear arms.  People are actually asking where they can get subscriptions to Pravda.  Did you ever think you'd see the day?  From the Pravda article:

These days, there are few things to admire about the socialist, bankrupt and culturally degenerating USA, but at least so far, one thing remains: the right to bear arms and use deadly force to defend one's self and possessions.

That'll get our attention.

The writer discusses what the Communists did when they took over Russia:

One of the first things they did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.

To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still denied our basic and traditional rights to self defense. Why? We are told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would be everywhere....but criminals are still armed and still murdering and too often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the uniforms of the police. The fact that everyone would start shooting is also laughable when statistics are examined.

And...

For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room. Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack. ..

...The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?

Finally...

So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.

COMMENT:  We've said repeatedly here that we have no problem with lawful, effective measures to reduce gun violence.  There are many steps that can be taken, some of which are being discussed.  (I would add mandatory training, by the way.  We insist that drivers be trained, why not gun purchasers?  We require mandatory training to get a pistol permit in New York, and the Second Amendment hasn't collapsed.) 

But I fear that many members of the "gun-control" crowd really favor confiscation, and even the abolition of the Second Amendment.  Some of them frankly have no problem with criminals having guns, or even with high crime rates, since those things ratify their dark view of American society.  Criminals aren't criminals.  They're "oppressed victims of a capitalist, racist society."  Do I have that lingo right?

It's a balance.  We have a First Amendment, but free speech isn't absolute.  We have a Second Amendment, which I strongly support.  But we can do some things, consistent with that Constitutional provision, to make society safer.  We need wise heads right now.  Look at who we've got.

Do we really need Pravda to set us straight?

January 10, 2013