Think about this.  Thirty (30) years ago firearms were effectively outlawed in the UK.  Today in England, Scotland and Wales, you can and likely will be prosecuted for ‘offensive’ social media posts.  The once great leader on the World stage has effectively been castrated as evidenced in its stance toward current events.  So who determines what is and isn’t offensive?  Truth gives way to the cultural mob of the moment.  A house with no foundation surely will fall.

Years ago, I was invited to serve as a lobbyist representing the firearms industry in Washington DC.  The anti-gun lobby had developed a strategy with many of the nation’s largest cities to sue the industry into bankruptcy.  Whether they won the lawsuits (they didn’t) or they lost (they did), the plan was to win the war against gun ownership through attrition and unsustainable costs.  Most gun manufacturers, distributors and retail outlets saw their insurance rates quadruple, or higher.  Paid for, as with all special ‘social’ interests efforts, by you the consumer.  The cities joining the lawsuits with visions of financial windfalls dancing in the heads. This is a backdrop for the purpose of this post.  

The lawsuits contended that the firearms industry was negligent for not providing trigger locks with each gun being sold.  On the surface, this seemed logical.  BE CAREFUL, only 10% of an iceberg is above water, 90% is submerged and not seen.

The strategy of the anti-gun groups was (and still is) that any concession of missed safety protocols, would break the proverbial dam, and liability for negligence even to the point of holding the industry liable for a customer’s behavior would flood our legal system.  “If you can’t legislate them out, litigate them to death” was a common phrase.  Removing any personal responsibility expectation.  Sound familiar.   Using this thought process, Ford or General Motors could be sued for negligence when the vehicles they manufactured were involved in an accident resulting in injury or death by any driver, even those impaired, unlicensed or illegal.  Or, continuing this thought, Louisville Slugger  could be held liable if the bat they manufactured was used as a weapon, versus what it was designed for, hitting balls.

My role during the lobbying was to present the associative risks of owning a firearm, compared to other consumer products.  And as you likely have guessed, making a case for firearms as a safe product was very simple.  At the time, bicycles caused significantly more injuries to children than gun violence.  Football more trauma.  Car accidents exponentially more injuries and death.  All activities chosen by the consumer with an understanding of certain degrees of risk.  By the way, I respect your position on firearms and changing your stance is not the purpose of my post.  The simple truth is this, a culture that dismisses the value of life will use whatever means at their disposal to end life.  Do you really think the signers of our Constitution envisioned the ending of 64-million lives (and growing by over a million annually) because the lives were deemed a choice, versus a responsibility?

As I was presenting our case for gun ownership, extending beyond the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, a Senator at the time from Mississippi, Trent Lott said in his deep southern drawl, “Mr. Mullins, son you just don’t get it.  We all know your products are safe, but mamas and daddies drive their kids to soccer now.  They don’t teach them to shoot like they did when I was a boy.  You are fighting fear that has no desire to be rational.”  And there it was, the issue was perception influenced by the agendas of the few.  Agendas with much deeper and insidious strategies than the 10% on the surface would ever reveal.  Create unreasonable fear and the masses are easily controlled under the guise of good stewardship.  Ask standardized testing companies how our children are testing since COVID.  We so quickly surrendered inalienable rights to assuage the fears of the masses, sans any truly reliable data.  And today we pay.

In 1997 the United Kingdom (England, Scotland & Wales) passed a law fundamentally prohibiting handgun ownership and significantly restricting shotgun and other long gun ownership.  This happened because of what the media titled, ‘massacres’ in two unrelated and tragic shootings that took the lives of too many.  One is too many, by the way!  So the problem was addressed and resolved.  Remove the rights of the masses.  One problem, violent crime rose in the years after the law was passed, with robberies increasing by 45% and murder by 54%.  

The insidiousness of the laws passed in the UK to ‘protect’ its citizens is having the desired effect.  The law-abiding citizens are more easily controlled while criminals continue to be criminals.  What lies beneath requires study and understanding that I am afraid is being surrendered to ChatGPT that, you guessed it, offers answers generated from human data.  Human data with 90% of its agenda beneath the surface.

Where am I going with this rambling?  There is an underlying movement in Western Christianity today to erode the veracity of scripture.  THE BIBLE, the singular source of absolute truth’s message is slowly being eroded under the rejection of Biblical patriarchy versus complementarianism.  What seems to be a modern and independent challenging of scripture, has the markings of the iceberg.  Present 10% of the argument for scriptural error and acceptance will reveal and erode the remaining 90% of currently accepted truths.  There is no 90% right.  There is 100% wrong, if the 10% known is reasoned to be with error.

“Those who would learn the things of God, and be assured of them, must know the Holy Scriptures, for they are the Divine revelation. The age of children is the age to learn; and those who would get true learning, must get it out of the Scriptures. They must not lie by us neglected, seldom or never looked into. The Bible is a sure guide to eternal life. The prophets and apostles did not speak from themselves, but delivered what they received of God.  2 Peter 1:21.  It is profitable for all purposes of the Christian life. It is of use to all, for all need to be taught, corrected, and reproved. There is something in the Scriptures suitable for every case. Oh that we may love our Bibles more, and keep closer to them! then shall we find benefit, and at last gain the happiness therein promised by faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the main subject of both Testaments. We best oppose error by promoting a solid knowledge of the word of truth; and the greatest kindness we can do to children, is to make them early to know the Bible.” Matthew Henry’s Commentary on 2 Timothy 3:14-17.

The idiom “give them an inch and they’ll take a mile,” was a proverb in John Heywood’s 1546 collection.  (Substituting ‘ell’ with ‘mile.’)  Malcolm X was said “a man who stands for nothing, will fall for anything.”  This same sentiment made popular in the ‘90’s by country singer Aaron Tippin’s song, “You’ve Got to Stand for Something.”  

The question is does your commitment to truth match and exceed the passionate purposes of those who reject those very truths?  I have no issue with opinion, but marvel at how quickly opinion retreats when truth and reason enter the conversations.

“Evil succeeds when good men (people) do nothing.”  Edmund Burke