Saturday, June 17, 2023

Liberty better than imaginary safety

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for May 14, 2023)

There is a common weapon of mass murder on our streets; nearly everyone has at least one sitting around. They've probably been used to kill more people in total than any other weapon. They are routinely left in yards, on the streets, and scattered around town; unattended and often unlocked.

One was used to kill my older daughter.

Knowing this, do I believe they should be banned or regulated? No, because I'm not an idiot. 

I'm talking about cars.

The argument to ban guns or more heavily regulate gun owners-- and let's be honest; gun owners are the target, not the guns-- is just as ridiculous. You are being lied to from every angle to make you accept the fake narrative.

Some claim that you can't compare cars and firearms because cars are used for a variety of purposes, but a gun's "only purpose is to kill people". These people couldn't be more wrong if they were doing it on purpose. It tells you more about their inner shortcomings and ignorance than it does about reality.

Cars are used to harm and kill innocent people, but the benefits outweigh the risks, The same is true for guns.

Bad guys use both to hurt and kill. Hopeless people use both to end their own lives-- it probably happens more often than is recognized where cars are concerned. Accidents happen. And normal, everyday people use cars and firearms to save lives, and as a hobby, for sports, and for every other legitimate purpose. To claim firearms are only used to kill is to admit you don't know what you're talking about.

Legislation targeting gun owners is popular. Those who hate us seem almost delighted anytime an evil loser goes on a shooting spree; it makes their pro-slavery opinions seem relevant to the most gullible people in society.

The right to own and to carry the proper tools for self-defense isn't subject to majority opinion. It doesn't come from any document and can't be eliminated by abolishing the Second Amendment. Any politician who makes up a rule violating this right is a criminal. It doesn't matter what excuses are used.

Liberty is more important than imaginary safety, or even life. As some will point out, without life you have no liberty-- but you won't care. Without liberty life is a nightmare. This is why slavery is wrong. This is why I oppose all legislation concerning weapons.
I couldn't do this without your support.

What did they think would happen?

People don’t consider consequences.

For years, residents of this town have wanted an overpass so we won't be trapped when trains are blocking the railroad crossing-- cutting us off from emergency services and being generally inconvenient. My mother was even interviewed by a news crew doing a report on this several years ago.

The problem is, about half the time when you cross the tracks, you'll have to wait for a train or two. Sometimes you get caught by three trains, and sometimes a train will stop, blocking the crossing for half an hour or more. And if one crossing is blocked, pretty often the other crossing is also blocked. Our trains are long. So, we are trapped. If you need to be somewhere it can be a real problem.

The main bureaucratic roadblock is that the overpass would cross the state line, half being in Texas and half in New Mexico, and neither state has wanted to be bothered with it. An overpass would benefit the Texas residents more since the nearest town with shops, services, and emergency medical facilities is in New Mexico. The Texas side is the side that gets cut off from the world (not that this is necessarily a bad thing in all cases).

Something may have finally changed. They are having a governmental "meeting" in town to discuss such a project. And suddenly, residents are realizing such a project will require the destruction of many businesses and houses.

Did they think an overpass would suddenly materialize out of nothing, and simply replace the current highway's footprint? Did no one actually understand what they were asking for? It sure seems that way to me. 

I have long believed the best solution-- but one the railroad would never agree to-- is to rebuild the railway to incorporate a bridge over the existing highway. Yes, it would be expensive, requiring miles of gradual grade on both sides of the crossing to get the tracks high enough. Yes, it would be necessary to divert trains around the construction for as long as the construction takes. Maybe years. But I think it is the only way it could be done without taking private property.

Or, the residents can just live with things as they stand.

A (Big) birthday is coming Sunday-- if you want to send a gift.
Thank you!