The Danger of Appeasement

While Obama is doing downward facing dog with regards to his “negotiating” with Iran over nukes, i just starting thinking of all the times the stance of appeasement failed.  You can read more about the compelling argument that appeasement now has shadows of Neville Chamberlain in 1938 Munich at Conservativebytes.com

Mike Devine makes the amusing parody of Obama’s Iran policy as “If you like your nuclear enrichment policy, you can keep it, period.”

The examples of failure, that the idea of appeasement provides, are extensive and cover the world over.  It all hearkens back to Benjamin Franklin’s famous line, “Those who would trade in liberty for a little temporary security deserve neither liberty or security.”  With appeasement, by continually giving in a little at a time in order to avoid making a stand and face the growing threat only makes the inevitable all the harder to recover from.

I will leave the proliferation of nuclear weapons of rogue nations, the annexing of Czechoslovakia by Nazi Germany and the systematic theft under false treaties of the American Indian to others to bandy about.

But what I will point out is the danger of appeasement in America.  Not of appeasing rogue dictators or extremists like our current President seems to enjoy, but rather the appeasement that some gun owners feel obligated to grant when the controllers come for our guns.  In fact appeasement, which many like to camouflage as “compromise”, is what has gotten this country in so much trouble.  Not that we have found middle ground on issues but that we have invalidated our beliefs in order to maintain the whisper of what our belief originally was.

There are a myriad of topics that this can be applied to but I’ll focus on the American gun owner.

Yes, we have the ignorant gun owner who actually thinks the 2nd Amendment is about hunting and that all other guns should be banned.  I’m not talking about them because they are simply gun controllers of a different shade.

I’m referring to the gun owners who actually believe in the 2nd Amendment but rationalize that, in order to keep some of the right to keep and bear arms, we must allow for a little infringement.  They believe that by feeding the beasts of the Brady Campaign and Bloomberg’s minions that that will somehow sate the voracious appetites of  those who gorge themselves on denying us our liberty.

By giving them any ground we cut our legs out from under us and the easier it will be for them to press forward and take the inch we gave them and stretch it to a mile and beyond.

This is the reason that compromising and appeasing those who wish to see the right to keep and bear arms erased from our very consciousness will never be a wise policy.  If you are a true believer in the right to keep and bear arms you cannot allow yourself to be hoodwinked.

Common sense gun control?  An oxymoron used to ease the shoveling of the controllers dogma down the throats of the masses.

The minute we started having to ask the government permission to exercise our rights the appeasement began and it hasn’t stopped in a hundred years.  Americans shouldn’t need carry permits, they shouldn’t have to have background checks, they shouldn’t be barred from or pay a tax for machine guns or silencers, there shouldn’t be bans on open carrying of firearms and there shouldn’t be a government list of gun owners.

To some that may seem a bit out there but in truth, all the things I had just mentioned in the previous sentence only effects LAW ABIDING CITIZENS.  A criminal isn’t going to ask the government if it’s “ok” to commit a crime or submit themselves to a background check, or register their firearms to begin with.  A criminal will get their machine gun from Mexico thanks to Obama’s Fast and Furious Export scheme.

Yet we started appeasing the controllers a century ago and they have whittled and chipped away at the only Amendment that specifically states that it itself is inviolate.

Now, that appeasement has set us back where we have to fight and scratch for every inch of that right to be returned to us while simultaneously digging in our heels to make sure we move back no further.

It would have been better if we had never given those rights up in the first place.  Once something is given away, there is no guarantee that it can be returned.

And that is the danger of appeasement.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

  • Pingback: Good article - Shooting Sports Forum()

  • Dean Weingarten

    You are absolutely correct. The infringements did not even give us any more safety, just the illusion of safety. The “progressive” movement has always been about taking power form the people and giving it to the government under the illusion of adding “safety”.

Send this to friend