The U.S. Department of Homeland Security recommends that people use scissors to defend themselves against crazed shooters armed with semi-automatic rifles (and very likely on psychotropic drugs; h/t Natural News). It’s very strange, but for some inexplicable reason, they don’t talk about how you could also, instead of relying on scissors, carry a firearm of your own and use it to defend yourself and other innocent people around you in such a scenario. I can’t imagine why they wouldn’t think to point out that option, even though the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America explicitly protects the individual right to bear arms! How odd.
V.P. Joe Biden is a bit closer to the right idea when he says to get a shotgun:
But it’s still very strange he doesn’t suggest people get a firearm more suitable for self-defense, like a semi-automatic AR-15 with a high-capacity magazine. It’s almost as though the government was waging some kind of propaganda campaign for gun-control in violation of the Constitution! But we know the government would never violate the Constitution! I mean, it’s not as though the words “shall not be infringed” in the Second Amendment are hard to understand or anything.
The best plan for reducing gun violence in the U.S. I’ve seen yet is Bob Wenzel’s at Economic Policy Journal:
- Abolish the DEA and end the war on drugs.
- Abolish the FDA and government involvement in drugs.
- End minimum wage laws.
- Abolish the Department of Education and end public school education.
- End gun control.
Points 1, 2, and 5 would be particularly effective, although I think it is an enormous oversight of Wenzel’s not to include on the list ending the government’s role of setting the example for criminal lawlessness, violence, and mass murder.