Right on the heels of the Binghamton, NY shootings, another shooting took place today in Pittsburgh, PA. Three police officers were killed by a 23 year-old man, Richard Poplawski, who was recently laid off from his job and who ardently believed that the Obama administration was going to take away his rights. This idea is not uncommon. Apparently, Poplawski had told his long-time friend, right before the shootout, that he was opposed to “Zionist propaganda” and thought that his right to bear arms was going to be taken away. He claims that he was not part of any militia or organization.

Already, the blogosphere is abuzz with talks of how he was a “right-wing nutjob” and how the right is responsible for the paranoia that caused this. Actually, if anything, this is an extreme and insane reaction to what is increasingly looking like a liberal hijacking of this country. This man was disturbed and, from the looks of his comments on Zionist propaganda, may have subscribed to an extremist far-right ideology that believes that the United States is being controlled by “Zionist” elements. This sort of extremism runs contrary to the intent of the second amendment and the Constitution in general, whose purpose to protect citizens from those who would do harm to them. Furthermore, if this person truly cared about the second amendment, then he would not have abused it as he did and cost the lives of three officers who were sworn to protect his. Mr. Poplawski was either pro-gun control or irrational or both.

While this event may have been in part motivated by the siege mentality that comes from living under “one-party rule” (democrats controlling congress and the executive), the real underlying cause is the instability of this individual and his extremist beliefs. I agree that gun ownership rights are a double-edged sword, but the crimes of a few must not outweigh the necessary rights of a whole nation. In the face of consecutive tragedies, many are scrambling to destroy the second amendment while there are few with the moral courage to stand in defense of the Constitution.

If we pass laws to ban guns in America, only the law-abiding will be gun-less. The bad guys will always be able to procure weapons. Will we allow people like Mr. Poplawski to take away our right to self-defense, our right to defend against tyranny? Will we tell the old man working the night shift at his quickie shop in a bad neighborhood that he cannot defend himself? Will we tell a father (or mother) that he (or she) cannot protect his family from a gang that invades his (or her) home? The irony is that if liberals have their way, it will be the criminals who motivate our government to ban guns, and it will be the criminals who benefit the most from an unarmed law-abiding population… oh, and it will also benefit any government that would decide to take away any of our other rights.

We added those rights in the Constitution when Americans lived in a time where tyrannical governments were seen as the greatest threat to the people, while nowadays, in this country founded on freedom, we see crime as the greatest threat. I guess we just have to experience tyranny again so that we can decide which is worse… and destroying the second amendment will help us get there sooner.

-AG