Thursday, November 19, 2015

Donald Trump is now the Leading Second Amendment Supporter

In an exclusive to, Donald Trump has called for Americans to bear arms to increase security in the United States.  From
Carrying a weapon is not always feasible or appropriate. However, given the increased tensions that are the result of continued, escalating terrorism around the world, more legitimately armed individuals on the streets is a positive outcome. Each permit holder must make the decision to carry or not carry. I will carry more often than I have in the past, and I am sure other concealed permit holders will do the same. Do we have an obligation to carry? The answer is “yes,” but we must do it in such a way as to raise serious doubts in the minds of those who might be considering violence in America. Deterring violence is far better than dealing with the aftermath of an act of terror. Less blood, more security. That is what will make America great again.
Donald Trump shows that he understands reality better than most of the politicians in the nation.  This continues his breakthrough strategy of ignoring the censorship imposed by the media cartel in the name of "political correctness".    The concept of the citizenry being armed to defend against threats is as old and as obvious as mankind.  Only in the last hundred years, with the rise of "progressivism", has the weird idea that people are safer when disarmed been marketed to the public as a sane concept.

In Europe, people carried arms all over the continent before WWI.  In the British Empire, British Citizens had the right to keep and carry arms.  It was only after WWI that elites all around the world marketed the idea that the public would be "safer" if they were disarmed.

The elites feared an overthrow of their elite order, and believed that the elites would be safer if the public were disarmed.  That is how British elites imposed "gun control" by deception.  What the empire had imposed on its subjects, they now imposed on its citizens.

The idea of disarming citizens in the United States had started in the South, where permit systems were designed to keep blacks, who had not been citizens, disarmed.  The laws were never meant to disarm the majority of the citizenry.  That strategy backfired, as more and more "progressives" were elected, and started to apply those prohibitions to all.

The concept was promoted by the increasing power of the "progressive" movement,  a movement that rested on the theory that the majority of the people were too stupid to govern themselves, and that the "consent of the governed" must be manufactured by the elite, particularly the elite that controlled mass media.

"Progressives" spread the concept into states outside the South.  In New York, with the infamous Sullivan law, meant to protect the corrupt criminal/political Tammany Gang of New York, and California, where the elite wanted to be able to keep Hispanics and Chinese minorities disarmed and controlled.  Notably, neither New York or California have a state constitutional protection for the right to keep and bear arms.  They are two of only six states that lack such protection.

The "progressive" media cartel, formed by the early newspaper chains and the Associated Press, nurtured and strengthened by the FCC, censorship during WWII, and the leftist takeover of the journalism schools and the networks in the 1960's, pushed the notion of citizen disarmament relentlessly.

The media cartel no longer has the ability to control the information flow.  It has been superseded by technological advances, just as it was made possible by the rise of the mass media.  It can no longer prop up the absurd notion that people are safer when they are disarmed.

The last shreds of disinformation used to create that illusion have disintegrated with the victory of concealed carry activists across the United States.  Those victories forced the Supreme Court to uphold the Second Amendment.  In practical terms, it has shown that armed citizens are more law biding than the average police officer.

Donald Trump is speaking a truth that cannot be denied.  Long ago, before the media cartel started its incessant propaganda to convince Americans that they were safer when disarmed, Niccolo Machiavelli, the archetypal scholar of power politics said it this way:
There is no comparison whatever between an armed and disarmed man; it is not reasonable to suppose that one who is armed will obey willingly one who is unarmed; or that any unarmed man will remain safe.... - Niccoló Machiavelli, The Prince. 1537.
Donald Trump, leading by example, is becoming the armed leader that a free people can respect.  Not long ago, we learned, unsurprisingly, that Ronald Reagan routinely went about armed

Can  anyone imagine the current "progressive" leadership having the sense to extol an armed citizenry as one of the great defensive resources of the Republic?  Can anyone imagine one of the "progressive" candidates leading by example?   In a recent debate, all three Democrat candidates fell over themselves, trying to find ways that they could disarm Americans through deceit.

That horse has left the stable.

Donald Trump has shown that he trusts the American people.  "Progressives" show that they fear and distrust the people, who they believe are too stupid to govern themselves.

©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.  Link to Gun Watch


Anonymous said...

There is nothing in the constitution that requires vetting of anyone to keep and bear arms. The United States Constitution covers every citizen in this country no matter where you live. I have a second amendment right to keep and bear arms anywhere in this country and I do not need anyone else's permission to do so. Crossing a state line does not change the constitution. the tenth amendment requires all states to uphold and enforce all issues addressed in the federal constitution and that is where it is stated Shall Not Infringe. the states have no authority or power to change the federal constitution. I remain a citizen any where I am inside the borders of this country. There are no qualifiers written and none permitted.

91B4S said...

First, to Anonymous, Hear, Hear! Absolutely correct reading of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Next, to Mr. Weingarten, this is perhaps the very best article that you have ever published, which, considering the overall quality of your published facts and opinions, is saying quite a bit. As recently as the beginning of WWII, Admiral Yamamoto, famously said of the armed citizenry of the United States, "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." As you pointed out the totalitarian Progs have gone a long way to undermine this basic characteristic of American citizens, as they have done so successfully elsewhere, but they have failed to complete their task, and today we have a vigorous resurgence of 2nd amendment awareness and reverence, and recognition of it's necessary and honored place in our society of free men and women governing themselves!

Again,this is a really good article, and you should be quite proud of the consistently sane, rational, and honest positions that you have taken, and the statements that you have made. You are a good man, and a very good American. G-d Bless.