In a rare Oval Office speech on December 6, President Obama led off by addressing the tragic shootings in San Bernardino on December 2 that took 14 lives, and as he did in his weekly address the previous day, once again called for more gun control. On December 6, he said that the San Bernardino shootings were “another tragic reminder that here in America it’s way too easy for dangerous people to get their hands on a gun.” In his Oval Office address, he repeated his mantra: “We also need to make it harder for people to buy powerful assault weapons like the ones that were used in San Bernardino.”
As he frequently does, Obama called his proposed gun control “gun safety measures.”
Before getting into gun control, Obama touched on several aspects of terrorism, even as he admitted that there is no evidence that the San Bernardino “killers were directed by a terrorist organization overseas, or that they were part of a broader conspiracy here at home.”
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
Starting with the observation that “our nation has been at war with terrorists since al-Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11,”Obama moved closer to the present by stating that as our nation has become better at stopping terrorist attacks of the magnitude of 9/11, the terrorists have “evolved” into a new phase — “less complicated acts of violence like the mass shootings that are all too common in our society.”
Obama quickly jumped into the war against ISIS — using the preferred government acronym ISIL, which deemphasizes Syria, the place where the Obama administration’s support for the anti-Assad rebels helped turn ISIS into a major threat. In outlining his anti-terrorism strategy, Obama listed four steps in his plan to hunt down and destroy the very terrorists his own interventionist foreign policy in Syria helped create.
The first two of these steps consist of military operations such as airstrikes and providing training and equipment to tens of thousands of Iraqi and Syrian forces fighting ISIS on the ground and includes sending in U.S. Special Operations Forces. The second two steps involve intelligence sharing and diplomacy.
Obama then moved his anti-terrorism war from overseas to the home front. It is interesting that during our nation’s long history, even during two world wars against major military powers such as Germany and Japan and a long cold war against the Soviet Union, all of which had large and extensive espionage networks, no domestic terrorist attacks of the size of 9/11 ever occurred. It was only after our nation began its interventionist foreign policy in the Middle East that sufficient “blowback” was created to fuel those attacks. One of Obama’s proposals to protect us from terrorist attacks domestically actually makes sense: “we should put in place stronger screening for those who come to America without a visa so that we can take a hard look at whether they’ve traveled to warzones.” However, the others amount to nothing more than infringements on the liberties of law-abiding Americans, especially the right to keep and bear arms that is guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
The first of these is: “Congress should act to make sure no one on a no-fly list is able to buy a gun.”
And the second is: “We also need to make it harder for people to buy powerful assault weapons like the ones that were used in San Bernardino.”
In response to the presidential address, a well-known father-and-son political duo each made statements expressing serious reservations. Presidential candidate and Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) spoke out against what he called Obama’s “outrageous quest to turn a necessary discussion on terrorism and national security into an unnecessary and ineffective gun control debate.” Concerning gun control, Paul said:
Let’s be clear: disarming more law abiding citizens will not stop mass murderers and terrorists. We should be advocating for more concealed carry ability for law abiding Americans and an end to unconstitutional gun free zones.
Paul also called for better border security, noting:
We must fully examine and reform our border security, including refugee and visa programs. While the President paid lip service to this fight, he plans to keep the failed current rules in place and allow tens of thousands of refugees to enter our country.
Paul also criticized the interventionist foreign policy though which the Obama administration actually helped ISIS come to power, by helping the anti-Assad rebels in Syria, some of whom were actually allies of ISIS:
We must stop arming and training allies of ISIS and al Qaeda. We should not double down on this failed and dangerous policy that the President called for tonight.
Paul’s father, former Representative and presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-Texas) also had plenty to say about the president’s address. The elder Paul also addressed Obama’s gun-control proposal.”
Concerning the never-ending interventionist foreign policy that has spanned several presidential administrations, the elder Paul said:
Sadly, I don’t see much to be gained from President Obama’s speech from last night on gun control and ISIS. We’re now apparently involved in a war that both Republicans and Democrats don’t see an end to. Perpetual war is a sure-fire prescription for government to continue to erode and take away our liberties.
And, as might be expected, Paul pointed out what is obvious to every constitutionalist: the Obama war on the Second Amendment:
The major liberty that President Obama attacked last night is a person’s right to defend himself with a gun. The President was slightly deceitful when he said the following words: “What can be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semi-automatic weapon?” He argued that a person on a no-fly list should be banned from buying a gun.
However, just think of all the errors that are on the government’s no-fly list. There aren’t just a couple of dozen mistakes, but probably thousands of people that are erroneously on the list.
There is a way to break free of the never-ending cycle of inflaming the world, inciting terrorist “blowback,” and suspending the Bill of Rights to “protect” us from terrorists. It consists of following the advice of our wise Founders to mind our own business. As John Quincy Adams wrote in 1821: “[America] goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.”
Thomas Jefferson wrote a short and simple defense of the right to keep and bear arms in a draft for the Virginia Constitution in 1776: “No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
As for why this right is so important, Noah Webster wrote in An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787): “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe oppressive.”
Obama has an entirely different philosophy, however. It is: Spend countless energy and lives going abroad, in search of monsters to destroy, while disarming the people at home.
Related articles:
John Lott Shoots Holes in Obama’s Claims About Gun Violence in America
Detroit Police Chief: Terrorists Want Unarmed Citizens
San Bernardino Victims Defenseless in “Gun-free Zone”
There Is No “Pattern” of Mass Shootings in America
Obama Seizes on Colorado Planned Parenthood Attack to Promote Gun Control
