“But to ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow. . . . For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals. Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding.” —Jefferson B. Snyder
On Monday, December 15, 2014, Vivek Murthy was confirmed as the nation’s 19th surgeon general by a vote of 51 to 43. Only 37 years of age, Murthy’s credentials for the job were questioned by senators in both parties, the main question being whether or not he has enough experience to be Surgeon General of the United States.
Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) is an orthopedic surgeon who liked Murthy’s academic credentials but said he is unqualified to be surgeon general, due to his lack of real-world experience. Said the senator, “Is Dr. Murthy a renowned expert in treating patients or researching diseases? No, not at all. . . . Has he actually built a career teaching medicine or leading public health organizations? No, not yet.”
Vivek Murthy, Victim Disarmer
The National Rifle Association, perhaps Murthy’s most vociferous opponent, has called him a “serious threat to the rights of gun owners” due to his support of radical victim-disarmament policies. The strong antipathy towards Murthy dates back to a tweet Murthy sent out in 2012: “Tired of politicians playing politics w/guns, putting lives at risk b/c they’re scared of NRA. Guns are a health care issue.”
Although Murthy, when questioned, said, “I do not intend to use the surgeon general’s office as a bully pulpit for gun control,” it is also obvious that his lack of experience and judgment make him all the more malleable in President Obama’s hands. He will say, “Yes,sir!” and do as he is told, despite any claims he will not politicize his office, or else he is wont to suffer the same fate as Chuck Hagel.
Medical Doctors, the New Government Spies
Under Obamacare, in 2014, according to an Obama executive order, doctors were instructed to start asking patients whether or not they have firearms at home. The answer to this question should always be no, whether you are a gun owner or not. I shall explain.
Let us say you answer this question yes, or you merely intimate that you have been considering a gun purchase in order to protect your family. It will then be the doctor’s duty, according to our politically managed healthcare system, to probe for mental health issues. Are you suffering stress from a new job? How about some counseling to ease your cares? Or a Vivek Murthy-style directive may soon instruct all medical personnel, upon discovering you own a gun, to simply refer you for counseling for mental-health evaluation merely on the basis of your gun ownership. (Ironically, this would mean that gun ownership in and of itself would provide the basis for making you ineligible to own a firearm.)
Red Flags & Rights Divestment
The minute you go for counseling, or even just a mental health assessment, the doctor could document that you have “mental health issues.” This would red-flag you in the Obamacare network as “mentally unfit to have a firearm.” Your name would likely be checked against federal and state databases of registered gun owners, and, the next day, police could show up with a search warrant for your weapon, if it turns out that you are indeed a registered gun owner. The police may well be BATFE agents, FBI agents, or Federal Marshals, since the Obamacare database of registered gun owners would be federal. But local law enforcement could also be utilized.
When the police leave your home, they will be taking guns, kitchen knives, or anything else our anti-Constitutional administration deems inappropriate for you to own. In essence, the police will be leaving with your Second Amendment right to defend yourself. What happens if, after the government has grabbed your guns, your home is invaded? It has famously been said that, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away!
So You Want to Buy a Gun?
If you do not already own a gun, but you decide you need to get one for home defense in the future, you will be denied permission by the state to exercise your Second Amendment unalienable right to self-defense, due to the fact that you are a known user of counseling services. And your legal recourse will be limited, since Obama has been appointing more and more statist judges to federal benches, and any law suit will end up in the federal, not the state, court system.
Too Orwellian to believe? Not in Obamaworld. This is exactly the type of thing Democrats have been wanting. Remember, these are the same people who tried to repeal your free-speech rights last spring! (See my article about this at http://eaglerising.com/9516/will-obama-democrats-repeal-first-amendment/.) It is the kind of policy that Obama wants Vivek Murthy to enforce. Obama knows he cannot rid America of the Second Amendment, so he will use new methods, as yet untried in the courts, to see if he can get around the Second Amendment creatively.
Second Amendment Nullification Is Racist
Almost 47% of Americans use some kind of counseling services at some point in their lives. And Obama and the Democrats want to find ways to make this percentage go even higher. Soldiers returning from war will receive automatic counseling referrals in order evaluate them for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. This will deprive every service member who has been to war of his or her right to bear arms, on the basis that there is a mental health issue already in place, due to the veteran’s having been at war.
Can you imagine an America where an eventual majority of people are classified as having some form of mental illness? Gun ownership would plummet. This, in turn, would cause firing ranges to suffer drops in membership. Many would have to close, along with the gun shops they run as part of their businesses. Places to purchases guns would become scarcer, so the prices of firearms would increase. Fewer people, especially minorities who live in high-crime areas, would be able to afford the higher prices. So gun ownership would become especially rare in crime-ridden areas. This would drive up death rates from violent crime, especially in black communities across America.
Minorities would suffer the most from these policies of government nullification of the right to self-defense. Victim disarmament on such a scale would be nothing less than racist. As the work environment for criminals improves, especially in more impoverished areas, burglars and home invaders will no longer see being shot by a homeowner as a significant risk; murder, rape, and other violent crime rates would only continue to increase.
The English Debacle
After England instituted its gun ban in 1997, criminals had a field day, and England’s murder rate immediately rose about 50%. Fewer legally owned firearms meant more crime and more death by handgun than beforehand. This is because villains will always be able to get weapons. And no doctor anywhere can ever prevent a crook from procuring a gun.
Who said the Second Amendment had to be repealed, in order to deny freedom-loving Americans their right to keep and bear arms? With Obama and his statists on the job, our Constitution will never be properly enforced. The last irony is this one: Under Barack Obama, only common crooks get to enjoy their unalienable right to keep and bear arms!
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com