MARK CHRISTOPHER GARRETT
The country is polarized over "Gun" control.
The left wanting to ban "Military" style rifles and weapons, while the right is shouting we need our weapons for self defense.
Both are wrong in so many ways.
Between the 2 sides they are directing the main stream narrative for both, limiting dialog to only those choices and keeping the discussion on a distractionary issue instead of real debate on the actual language of the 2nd Amendment itself, which reads;
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,
shall not be infringed."
So, is it just me or did I miss the part about needing guns for hunting and self defense?
So, nowhere in the 2nd amendment does it mention anything about self defense or hunting, but yet that is what the Right and Left want to focus on, . . . why?
Because the real language scares them and they do not want you to understand your Full Rights Guaranteed to you as an American Citizen under the United States Constitution and Rule of Law.
At this point lets take a step back and look at it from a different perspective, how many times have you heard a phrase like these or similar, "Weaponized Media", Weaponized Propaganda", "Weaponized News", Weaponized Food", etc, . . .
Now lets take another step back, if we were to summarize in one word what the United States of America was founded on, and I'm sure this could be debated, but I would surmise we could sum it all up into the word
One of the reasons I postulate this is because it is clearly stated in the 2nd Amendment "Free State", among other reasons, but lets assume this to be truth, then it is not only necessary to keep up with "ALL the WEAPONS" any potential adversary may have including your own Government, but it is absolutely essential (this knocks out we should only have muskets debate).
What I mean by this is almost anything can be weaponized and turned against us from the internet, to t.v. to medicine, etc, are we as citizens to assume that since all these weapons of warfare are being used against us that we should not retaliate in the same way?, . . . Why Not?
What is a Weapon in this modern day War over our personal Freedom, and the supposed trade off for our security.
How do we define what is a weapon and what is just a harmless internet post.
Why are the Left and the Right stuck on a single narrative, when the full spectrum implication of this Amendment is so much grander.
The 2nd Amendment specifically gives us as Citizens the right to Arm ourselves by any and all means necessary with current state of the art up to date weapons of war, and that RIGHT shall not be infringed upon.
That is the plain and simple truth, if you start to buy into the Left Right Paradigm of Hunting, Safety, and self defense, you will for ever be stuck in an orchestrated infinite left/right argument feedback loop that will never end, (eternal Gunhog Day).
Our 2nd Amendment allows us to weaponize anything we see fit to keep and maintain a Free State, the constant chatter over an A.R.15 is hilarious as both sides want everyone to focus on just one tiny little aspect of what is essentially a full spectrum Constitutional Right.
It is time for Us the People to Direct the Narrative on our behalf.
We already know how much of the private sector has become weaponized for the establishment left, if that is your side great, but if you wish to defend our Constitution, our Country our Rule of Law then it is time to direct a new narrative.
. . . . . and remember, no matter which side of the debate you are on, without rule of Law, we have no Country, we have nothing.
The fact that we have our 1st Amendment allows us to debate this issue, but the fact that we have our Second Amendment allows us to freely exercise our 1st
Truly without the 2nd Amendment we would eventually lose all others, that is why it shall not be infringed upon, nor shall you define what we choose to call and use as a weapon to protect our Free State.
Crom a Boo -