listen here

Patriot Broadcast From the Trenches Schedule 

Or you can mail donations to Henry Shivley at P.O. Box 964, Chiloquin, OR 97624

Shredding the Constitution: The Port Arthur Phenomenon

American Thinker – by Edward Paltzik

The tragedy at Newtown’s Sandy Hook school has ignited a blistering attack on gun rights that could become the most successful campaign against the Second Amendment in the history of the United States.  In just over one month, emboldened opponents of our inalienable right to bear arms have seized commanding emotional, informational, and political advantages amidst the chaos of the national gun debate.  They have spread the contagion of gun control sentiment with alarming quickness and devastating effectiveness.

The viral dispersal of gun control sentiment in the United States during the past month is disturbingly reminiscent of the events that unfolded in Australia in 1996.  On April 28, 1996, a mentally ill individual by the name of Martin Bryant murdered 35 people during a shooting spree at a popular tourist site in Tasmania — an appalling occurrence known as the “Port Arthur Massacre.”  That same year, the Australian government, led by then-Prime Minister John Howard, enacted reactionary laws that annihilated the right to bear arms Down Under.  Nationwide gun confiscation ensued.  While many citizens vocally opposed the measures, their voices were ultimately drowned out amidst the hysteria.  In the blink of an eye, Australia’s longstanding tradition of gun ownership was reduced to a farce by Howard’s government juggernaut.

In a New York Times op-ed published last week, Howard chillingly reveals the irrational worldview shared by politicians of his ilk the world over who treat liberty as an option rather than an ideal: “Penalizing decent, law-abiding citizens because of the criminal behavior of others seemed unfair … [y]et I felt there was no alternative.”

Australia, it should be noted, did not have a constitutional right to bear arms.  However, if you think that the United States is immune to what we shall call the “Port Arthur Phenomenon” (defined as rapid, government-sponsored, and popularly backed destruction of gun rights amidst the hysteria following a mass shooting), you are in for a rude awakening.  Already, in some areas of the United States where the Constitution is considered arcane nuisance rather than national backbone, we are witnessing the viral power of the Port Arthur Phenomenon.

In New York (my home state), law-abiding gun owners were dealt a debilitating blow last week when Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law a frantically drafted and unconstitutional package of excessive gun control measures collectively known as the “NY SAFE Act” which, we are led to believe, was supported by a majority of New Yorkers.  Among other indignities: the measures subject New Yorkers to a reduction of maximum magazine capacity from 10 to 7 rounds and make the heretofore unthinkable notion of confiscation (or de-facto confiscation) a reality.  In clear defiance of the Second Amendment, the Act requires citizens to sell, within a year, any magazines that hold 8 or more rounds.  Clearly, the Act also has the potential to make a mockery of the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure.  How does the State plan to enforce this law when citizens defiantly keep their high-capacity magazines?

Although the situation is far better in fortresses of liberty such as Alaska, Texas, and Wyoming, far removed from the anti-gun fervor of post-constitutional jurisdictions such as California, Illinois, and New York, no State is immune to the injustice of federal gun control.

For individuals lacking political influence, the act of writing is therapeutic, but sadly, as last week’s events in New York demonstrate, writing in rebuttal to ardent gun control proponents may be about as effective as shouting for rescue while shipwrecked on Novaya Zemlya.  More is required.

Ironically, the literary work of a liberal Democrat from yesteryear illuminates the futility of direct intellectual engagement with the most dedicated opponents of the Second Amendment.  In the pages of Dr. Seuss, we learn of the dogged Professor de Breeze, who spends his entire adult life engaged in the noble but ultimately pointless endeavor of trying to teach Irish ducks how to read Jivvanese.  Some gun owners have rightly urged die-hard gun control proponents to redirect their misplaced energies to the root causes of mass shootings (such as mental illness).  Still other gun owners have dubiously asserted that appeasement is the answer, reasoning that legislative half-measures and compromise will ward off the gun-grabbers.  Unfortunately, as the one-sided  legislative action in New York confirms, gun-grabbers swing for the fences.  The efforts to deflect the energies of committed gun control proponents, or to compromise with them, are destined to fail as spectacularly as Professor de Breeze’s Irish Duck dreams.

Faced with the viral spread of the Port Arthur Phenomenon, gun owners should redirect at least some of their energies from the draining point-by-point gun control debate that inevitably plays into the hands of committed gun control proponents, who are inoculated against rational dialogue.  If you cherish the Second Amendment, devote at least some of your energy to the process of understanding the spread of the Port Arthur Phenomenon.

Perhaps some conditions that have allowed the Port Arthur Phenomenon to penetrate the American consciousness cannot be remedied in the short-term.  For example, the left, and by extension gun control proponents, enjoy a massively lopsided advantage in the media and at all levels of education.  That is an informational advantage that may take many years to close, particularly since the fields of journalism and education tend to attract a disproportionate percentage of reactionary idealists driven by a misguided need “fix” traditional America.

However, some of the conditions favorable to the spread of the Port Arthur Phenomenon can be diagnosed and remedied more effectively in the short term.  Gun control proponents in the media and in Washington have capitalized on two noteworthy national conditions during the past month: first, the utter apathy of many moderate conservatives, centrists, and even the occasional open-minded liberal, as well as the enormous pool of individuals who simply don’t care about anything other than celebrities, reality television, and video games; and second, the fact that millions of adults in the increasingly suburban and urban American population don’t know anything about guns.  This dangerous combination of apathy and ignorance allows politicians and journalists to get away with intellectually dishonest arguments, to repeatedly parrot inflammatory slogans such as “assault weapon,” and to peddle outright lies that stoke the flames of mass hysteria.

There is still time to write a happy ending to this sad story.  Fight the apathy on a neighborhood and local level.  Engage your persuadable or undecided family, friends, neighbors, and co-workers in a respectful discussion about gun issues and firmly explain what is at stake.  Educate them about gun terminology and gun safety.  Offer to take them to the shooting range.  Inundate your local, state, and national politicians with an avalanche of letters.  Organize counter-protests.  You may feel that your individual efforts are as futile as Professor de Breeze’s language lessons, but never give up.  If enough concerned citizens act with urgency, we may yet get results that would be the envy of the good Professor.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/shredding_the_constitution_the_port_arthur_phenomenon.html#ixzz2Id5lAAzv
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

This entry was posted in News. Bookmark the permalink.
1763
Don't forget to answer the Security Question before you post comment.

4 Responses to Shredding the Constitution: The Port Arthur Phenomenon

  1. starviego says:

    The Port Arthur Phenomenon:

    5-28-75 Centennial Secondary School
    “The Globe and Mail demands that the “government . . . get off its butt” and introduce tougher ‘gun control’ laws. ” “The proposals were recommended for legislation and passed. ”

    12-6-89 Ecole Poytechnique
    “The 1989 massacre also prompted the introduction of new gun-control measures, including the controversial gun registry..”

    3-13-96 Dunblane Primary School
    Bristish gun laws were made much more stringent in the wake of the shootings.

    4-28-96 Port Arthur/Broad Arrow Cafe
    Stringent anti-gun regulations for Australians were enacted in the wake of this shooting.

    2-28-97 North Hollywood Bank Shootout
    This incident was used as an excuse for the LAPD and then law enforcement across the country to “armor up” with heavier weapons, armoured vehicles, body armor, etc.

    3-28-98 Westside Middle School
    “…Federal Emergency Management Agency officials will help develop a national program to combat school violence in the aftermath of shootings at Westside Middle School near Jonesboro and other schools around the country, an agency official said Friday.

    4-20-99 Columbine
    “Congress under then president Bill Clinton sought to pass several gun control measures in response…”
    “One week after the Columbine shootings, President Clinton introduced legislation requiring background checks on sales of explosives and holding parents liable when their children commit crimes with guns. Whitehouse Press Secretary Joe Lockhart said: “Clinton is counting on outrage over the shootings to help push the legislation through, unfortunately oftentimes it takes tragic events to catalyze work here in Washington” ”

    12-26-00 Wakefield/ Edgewater Massacre
    “…gun control advocates held a rally outside the State House to urge lawmakers to ban the sale of assault weapons like McDermott’s.”

    4-26-02 Gutenburg Gymansium
    “….two hours after the attack, Germany’s parliament jumped into action and immediately tightened the nation’s weapons laws.”

    10-11-02 Myyrmanni Mall bombing
    “The Social Democrats seized the opportunity to intensify efforts to censor Internet news groups, bulletin boards and websites. A bill already going through parliament is seeking to extend restrictions on freedom of speech on the Internet.”

    5-11-06 Antwerp Street Shooting
    “Belgian lawmakers passed strict new gun control laws in 2006 in reaction to the racially motivated shooting deaths of a toddler and her black baby sitter in Antwerp.”

    11-7-07 Jokela High School
    “Such a tragedy in the normally peaceful Nordic nation should make Finland reconsider its campaign against European Union plans to tighten gun ownership laws for youngsters, a senior cabinet member told Reuters.”

    3-11-09 Winnenden/Albertville-Realschule
    “The German government has agreed to curb gun rights, two months after a 17-year-old killed 15 people with a pistol taken from his father’s bedroom…”

    4-10-09 OAED Vocational College
    “…an unprecedented incident for Greece that fueled debate about laws governing gun ownership…”

    4-30-09 State Oil Academy
    “The Azerbajaini Parliament’s Standing Human Rights Commission chair Rabiyyat Aslanova said that security must be increased in higher schools…. Aslanova said that cameras must be installed at the entrance to universities….”

    8-3-09 LA Fitness Club Shooting
    “Gov. Ed Rendell called it “another senseless shooting and a tragic shooting. It’s a case where someone who clearly shouldn’t have had a firearm because of mental problems had a firearm.” ”
    [Though not an overt call to change the gun laws, the threat of government action is implied in this statement.]

    11-26-09 Pecs University
    “(Justice Minister Tibor) Draskovics said that Hungary’s laws on the possession of firearms had to be reviewed to see if any tightening is necessary.”

    6-2-10 Cumbria taxi rampage
    “The government has promised to lead a national debate on the gun laws with MPs debating the issue before the end of July.”
    “If we are looking for what the problem is, it is clearly that in our society we have a huge number of guns that we need to get rid of.” –David Cameron, Prime Minister

    7-22-11 Norway/Utoya shooting
    http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2011/07/28/oslo-terror-attacks-justify-sinister-cyber-surveillance-programs-44591/
    In a knee-jerk reaction, that can only be compared to actions taken by U.S. bureaucrats in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks, politicians and law enforcement officials across Europe have joined in a growing chorus to demand legislation be enacted to require extensive spying on the online activities of citizens.

    4-7-11 Tasso da Oliveira Municipal School, Brazil
    –The House of Deputies has accelerated the progress of a project that requires the nstallation of metal detectors in all schools in Brazil.
    –The decision of the President of the Senate to propose a new national referendum on banning the sale of firearms and ammunition in the country comes four days after the tragedy at the Municipal School Tasso da Silveira…
    “I think Congress should examine the law of disarmament and once again fight for a ban on arms sales in Brazil. That is: zero tolerance for weapons, ” Sarney said early on Friday, arriving in the Senate.

  2. Paul says:

    “a mentally ill individual by the name of Martin Bryant murdered 35 people during a shooting spree at a popular tourist site in Tasmania”

    Like so many of these events, the official story doesn’t fit the facts on the ground. Like Sandy Hook, the Political response to Port Arthur appears to have been meticulously prepared in advance of the actual event.

  3. # 1 NWO Hatr says:

    Port Arthur is a lesson not lost on we patriots.

    Too bad the sheeple fail to grasp the connection.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

What is 4 + 5 ?
Please leave these two fields as-is:
IMPORTANT! To be able to proceed, you need to solve the following simple math (so we know that you are a human) :-)