USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- Rule-bound people tend to like laws and regulations because it takes away any guesswork when there may be uncertainty in the decision to be made.
Some like rules because it takes away responsibility for their own actions. As long as they follow the rules, it’s never their fault should something go wrong. They can always blame it on the government, their parents, their professor, or whomever. Because these people are happy to be told what to do, they are often willing to give up their own rights for a list of rules that are carefully crafted to keep them under control. Rules are often imposed under the guise of safety and with the intent of taking any decision-making out of the process. The ability to make decisions affords us a sense of self-empowerment.
What do we lose when our ability to make decisions is taken away? This is key in understanding the thought process of those who support laws that take away our right to make our own decisions.
In the attempt to achieve a hypothetical level of safety, rules are typically measured by what is “needed” and nothing more. In other words, you’ll never find a rule that requires you to enjoy yourself or take risks. The rule is always designed to limit or restrict rights, allowing only what is needed while still affording the appearance of freedom. Most always under the guise of “safety.”
The political left in America seems to have become very rule-bound and fearful in recent years. Many, attribute this to the Marxist indoctrination perpetrated in schools and media. This might explain why they default to a baseline of “need” and embrace the idea of slowly implementing additional freedoms only when absolutely necessary. “Necessity” is usually adjusted based on the level of resistance to the rule. This is most often due to the political damage the rule will bring. Once public outcry reaches a boiling point, rules are softened. Only to be re-implemented as resistance subsides. Rules are then reapplied, gaining ground and taking away more freedoms inch by inch with every re-application of the rule, mandate, or law.
Covid restrictions are a perfect example of this.
As we understand the role rules play in the lives of people, it’s no surprise that Anti-Gunners would say things like, “no one needs to carry a gun in public,” or “no one needs a gun that holds more than 10 bullets.” This makes perfect sense to them because freedom takes a backseat to safety and “need” becomes the metric by which rights should be measured. The anti-gun crowd realizes that they can’t break through the 2nd Amendment wall, so they do whatever they can to create a belief among the public that gun ownership should be measured by their definition of “need.”
The fact that our Founding Fathers acknowledged our God-given right to keep and bear arms does not appeal to those who tend to be rulebound because with rights comes the responsibility for one’s actions. For some, the idea of “rights and responsibility” is eagerly discarded in favor of the concept of “need and rules.” Problems occur when the “need” crowd decides that those who choose to govern their own lives, can no longer do so based on the irrational fear they possess. When a member of the fear club asks you, “why do you need an AR-15,” they’re not necessarily trying to trick you. Many truly believe that if you don’t need it, you shouldn’t have it.
If gun ownership was to be measured by a level of need, who do you think would determine whether or not you “need” to have a gun?
Our Founding Fathers understood that should people become fearful and rulebound, they would be easy to control and quick to give up their rights. This is why they never wrote “The Bill of Needs.”
About Dan Wos, Author – Good Gun Bad Guy
Dan Wos is available for Press Commentary. For more information contact PR HERE
Dan Wos is a nationally recognized 2nd Amendment advocate and Author of the “GOOD GUN BAD GUY” series. He speaks at events, is a contributing writer for many publications, and can be found on radio stations across the country. Dan has been a guest on the Sean Hannity Show, NRATV, and several others. Speaking on behalf of gun-rights, Dan exposes the strategies of the anti-gun crowd and explains their mission to disarm law-abiding American gun-owners.