I had written the following a while ago, for another site. What with talk of "a full court press" by Clinton et al, for the passage of gun control in the new session of The Congress, the following might be worth a thought or two.
RANDOM THOUGHTS: A FABLE FOR TODAY by Alan Schultz
There was, once upon a time, a fairly large country, that spanned a continent, ranging from sea to sea.
While there may have been happier nations, there certainly were larger ones, the one I speak of was at
least reasonably happy, and economically well off. Of course, not all was perfect, which is everywhere
the case with man and his institutions.
This nation, much hated by some, much criticized by others, much sought after by others, who braved all
manner of difficulties and dangers to get there, suffered the assorted slings and arrows from outside, and
pretty much managed, for much of the criticism was based on an old motive, jealousy.
The country had, from time to time, shared its treasure, it's energy, it's blood and it's efforts with other
nations, not entirely from altruistic motives, but it had done what it could. It had tried to help, when help
was needed.
This country, sometimes called a democracy, sometimes a constitutional republic, had a military service,
and an elected civil government, both of which had taken oaths to support and defend the constitution,
which was the basis of the countries government and laws. Funny thing was that the countries military
seemed to take it's constitutional oath more seriously than did members of the elected government, some
of whom seemed to be ever plotting to upset the constitutional rights of the citizenry.
While there were all manner of reasons given, times had changed, the constitution didn't really mean
"that", we will all be safer, though from what, nobody ever said. What was plainly involved was a matter
of elitism, and a question of trust. There was a group within the population of this country that just knew
that it was better than the rest of the population. Just ask them. Matter of fact, you didn't even have to
ask, they would tell you, usually with an air of moral superiority that seemed a stretch, to say the least.
In fact these folks were not any better than the rest of the populace, quite possibly, there were not even
as good as the rest, but that didn't matter, for they knew better, and they knew what was best for the
others. In reality, they did not trust the rest of the people, perhaps because they really attributed their own
failings, a sick desire for power, to the rest of the people, who for the most part, had no such desires.
The attitude of these elitists showed itself in a number of ways, but but it showed most clearly in one
issue. The issue dealt with the possession of arms. These elitists had little regard and less respect for Mr.
and Mrs. Everyman, for obviously they were lesser persons. All this despite the fact that the constitution
had long before, affirmed the right of all law abiding citizens to personal arms, if they wished to keep
them. Actually, some of the early state constitutions required the keeping of arms and suitable
ammunition. By the way, elitism and it's several manifestations was not limited to possession of arms. It
showed itself in other ways too, regarding matters beyond this discussion.
As for the country itself, it was a creation of an elite. Such creation was likely beyond the ability of the
common man, who was hard put to earn his living. There was however, a significant difference between
members of an elite, who were in fact, superior to most others of their time, and elitists, who so claimed,
but in fact, were not. The true elite, being not all that far removed from the commonweal, had great
respect, and regard for them. This elite was the last group that would have deprived the peaceful man of
arms, unlike the elitists, who feared and distrusted the commonweal.
It goes on, to this very day, and the issue has yet to be resolved. If Mr. and Mrs. Everyman allow these
elitists to gain all encompassing power, and they have, as a result of inattention, gained much power
already, much more than personal arms will be lost. Individual freedom, in all it's aspects will become a
thing of the past, remember only in history, assuming that history had not been rewritten by the "victors".
The answer lies, as the answers to important questions always do, with the people, if they choose to
speak. Only time will tell, and there might not be a surplus of time remaining.
If the foregoing was somewhat hard to read or follow, my apologies, but that seems to be the way it "copies and pastes", I don't know why.
RANDOM THOUGHTS: A FABLE FOR TODAY by Alan Schultz
There was, once upon a time, a fairly large country, that spanned a continent, ranging from sea to sea.
While there may have been happier nations, there certainly were larger ones, the one I speak of was at
least reasonably happy, and economically well off. Of course, not all was perfect, which is everywhere
the case with man and his institutions.
This nation, much hated by some, much criticized by others, much sought after by others, who braved all
manner of difficulties and dangers to get there, suffered the assorted slings and arrows from outside, and
pretty much managed, for much of the criticism was based on an old motive, jealousy.
The country had, from time to time, shared its treasure, it's energy, it's blood and it's efforts with other
nations, not entirely from altruistic motives, but it had done what it could. It had tried to help, when help
was needed.
This country, sometimes called a democracy, sometimes a constitutional republic, had a military service,
and an elected civil government, both of which had taken oaths to support and defend the constitution,
which was the basis of the countries government and laws. Funny thing was that the countries military
seemed to take it's constitutional oath more seriously than did members of the elected government, some
of whom seemed to be ever plotting to upset the constitutional rights of the citizenry.
While there were all manner of reasons given, times had changed, the constitution didn't really mean
"that", we will all be safer, though from what, nobody ever said. What was plainly involved was a matter
of elitism, and a question of trust. There was a group within the population of this country that just knew
that it was better than the rest of the population. Just ask them. Matter of fact, you didn't even have to
ask, they would tell you, usually with an air of moral superiority that seemed a stretch, to say the least.
In fact these folks were not any better than the rest of the populace, quite possibly, there were not even
as good as the rest, but that didn't matter, for they knew better, and they knew what was best for the
others. In reality, they did not trust the rest of the people, perhaps because they really attributed their own
failings, a sick desire for power, to the rest of the people, who for the most part, had no such desires.
The attitude of these elitists showed itself in a number of ways, but but it showed most clearly in one
issue. The issue dealt with the possession of arms. These elitists had little regard and less respect for Mr.
and Mrs. Everyman, for obviously they were lesser persons. All this despite the fact that the constitution
had long before, affirmed the right of all law abiding citizens to personal arms, if they wished to keep
them. Actually, some of the early state constitutions required the keeping of arms and suitable
ammunition. By the way, elitism and it's several manifestations was not limited to possession of arms. It
showed itself in other ways too, regarding matters beyond this discussion.
As for the country itself, it was a creation of an elite. Such creation was likely beyond the ability of the
common man, who was hard put to earn his living. There was however, a significant difference between
members of an elite, who were in fact, superior to most others of their time, and elitists, who so claimed,
but in fact, were not. The true elite, being not all that far removed from the commonweal, had great
respect, and regard for them. This elite was the last group that would have deprived the peaceful man of
arms, unlike the elitists, who feared and distrusted the commonweal.
It goes on, to this very day, and the issue has yet to be resolved. If Mr. and Mrs. Everyman allow these
elitists to gain all encompassing power, and they have, as a result of inattention, gained much power
already, much more than personal arms will be lost. Individual freedom, in all it's aspects will become a
thing of the past, remember only in history, assuming that history had not been rewritten by the "victors".
The answer lies, as the answers to important questions always do, with the people, if they choose to
speak. Only time will tell, and there might not be a surplus of time remaining.
If the foregoing was somewhat hard to read or follow, my apologies, but that seems to be the way it "copies and pastes", I don't know why.
as for the "Full Court Press" thing by Klinton and his minions on gun control; I personally think that we, as a group, along with as many other Gun owners in this fair land, should stand up, and with a unity of purpose, put on our own "Full Court Press" - Let's put the other side on the defense for a change.