PA Bill Number: HB1472
Title: In primary and election expenses, further providing for reporting by candidate and political committees and other persons and for late contributions ...
Description: In primary and election expenses, further providing for reporting by candidate and political committees and other persons and for late contrib ...
Last Action: Referred to STATE GOVERNMENT
Last Action Date: Apr 22, 2024
Facts, Emotions and the Ongoing Gun Debate :: 06/21/2018
After every school shooting, mass shooting or terrorist event, there will always be the unavoidable altercation of ideologies. It is unavoidable. The impassioned argument between Second Amendment supporters and gun-control advocates will never end. The two sides are discussing two totally different things. A dispute can never be settled if neither party agrees on the actual subject of that dispute.
This is not merely a case of “two sides of the same coin,” it’s two different coins. One coin is trying to solve the problem of the violence. The other coin merely wants to remove the first coin from the argument.
I am in the camp of Second Amendment supporters. Like many of my side, I use facts, logic, and referenceable numbers to argue my point of view. I research news articles and government websites to write articles, quoting those specific references. I pride myself on being able to prove my point and back it up with fact.
In the meantime, I watch in frustration as mainstream media outlets state nothing but emotion.
Arguments from them usually entail “Blame the NRA,” “It’s <insert any conservative politicians name here> fault,” or “the Second Amendment should be repealed." They are basically infomercials for the gun control ideology.
Even when it comes to solutions, the left is still about vagaries and emotional pleas. The argument that “something must be done” is purely unsubstantial. “Doing Something” without a clearly defined reason or objective can be a dangerous overreaction. We all want something to be done to stop these horrible events. However, some of us want to think the process through, rationally and logically.
Second Amendment supporters encourage solutions that may actually have some effect on improving public or school safety. Arming teachers so that they may have an opportunity to defend children is one of those ideas. It was inspired by stories of teachers who, though unarmed, fought back or shielded their students anyway, sacrificing themselves in the process. Imagine giving one of those brave teachers a tool to provide a fair chance to save lives, including their own. As we say in the gun rights community, “Firearms level the playing field.” In other words, guns give the weaker amongst us (women, elderly, handicapped) a fighting chance against those who are stronger or greater in number.
The opposition from the gun-control crowd to arming teachers has been, in keeping with their modus operandi, full of emotion and not fact.
According to NEA President Lily Eskelsen García, “Bringing more guns into our schools does nothing to protect our students and educators from gun violence. Our students need more books, art and music programs, nurses and school counselors; they do not need more guns in their classrooms.”
While most agree that schools do need more resources, books, and instruments will not save students from an evil person intent on killing. Unarmed nurses and school counselors can, but it may cost them their lives.
Another tactic of the left is to continuously scream for more gun control laws. They attack Congress for not acting and passing more laws immediately. In their typical irrational style, the media and anti-gun pundits ignore that there are 10,000+ local, state, and federal laws that cover almost every crime committed during these mass shootings or terrorist events. Exhibit A is that homicide is illegal federally and in all 50 states. That crime has the harshest consequences, including the federal death penalty, yet it fails to stop these motivated shooters. This is another example of liberalism putting all its faith in government solving every problem.
There is no consideration that these shooters are evil and merely want to cause maximum death, damage and heartache. If the liberals were to admit that there is actually “evil” in this world, it would indirectly be admitting that there is also “good.” For a secular ideology and media, that is just too close to admitting that God exists.
As a society that has a common goal of stopping these murderous events, we must put aside the ideologies and biases. These discussions must purely be based on fact and logic, leaving all hyperbole and blame out of it. I am not sure that is something that can ever happen, especially because I have not even mentioned that the debate must also recognize that our right to keep and bear arms is not negotiable. The Second Amendment has existed since 1791, protecting a right that is natural to all of us. It was not enacted in the late 1990’s when these school shootings started. It is not to blame.
I am sorry to confirm that, as I stated in my opening paragraph, this debate has no end. The anti-gun media and crowd will continue to say that Second Amendment and gun rights supporters are inflexible, but the truth is that emotion cannot compete with fact in an informed discussion. Those who know that they would lose would rather just point fingers and not even participate.
John Cylc is a conservative Christian and eight year U.S. Army veteran who primarily speaks out on the Second Amendment, gun rights issues, and contemporary topics. Born and raised in Philadelphia, he currently resides with his wife and youngest son in the foothills of the Smoky Mountains in beautiful East Tennessee. He is the founder of ThirteenFox.com and a contributor to LifeZette. Follow John Cylc on Twitter @The2ndA. To read more of his reports — Click Here Now.
https://www.newsmax.com/johncylc/second-amendment-gun-debate-schools/2018/06/20/id/867345/
