Gun Confiscators' Bait & Switch

Comments by Shieldwall and Harbinger on the post: “Winston Churchill on Islam” got me thinking. There is such a determined blindness to the obvious by people who advocate gun confiscation that one has to wonder just what is behind it.

It’s not really that difficult to see that if it becomes against the law to own a gun, law-abiding people will surrender their guns, but that people who do not obey the law will not. The inescapable conclusion is that the law-abiding will be unarmed, and law-breakers will be armed.

Logic compels this conclusion. As do the facts. Statistics consistently prove that gun crime increases when law-abiding citizens are stripped of their guns.

Gun-control advocates’ claim of gun confiscation creating a “safer” environment being clearly and self-evidently false, why do they nevertheless insistently demand that we create this dangerous, unsatisfactory state of affairs?

There are only two possibilities:

1) They are mentally deficient or diseased; rendered incapable of simple logic.

2) Their real goal is not what they claim.

Since it seems unlikely that so many people in any one group could be functionally insane, incapable of rational thought, it leaves the second option as the most reasonable conclusion.

As we stack up irrefutable facts and figures, statistics and evidence, they ignore or dismiss them, seemingly irrationally, because, in fact, they don't address their real agenda at all.

I think they pretend their goal is “safety” of "the children" to keep us occupied debating a red herring while they advance their real agenda.

And that leaves us with the question: What is their real goal?

And until we figure that out, we’re fighting a phantom.

The Gunslinger