The Sad, Unspoken Truth

Posted: January 4, 2013 by April Watkins in Child Safety, Current Issues, Gun Control, Protecting Our Children
Tags: , , ,

I have not written my column in quite a while.  I can give you tons of reasons, multitudes of excuses, but the truth is that I have felt that there is very little that I can do to open the eyes of the American public to what is happening to our country.  Our political correctness, our liberal approach to raising children, and our laissez-faire attitude towards the moral necessity of the family unit have created an environment which we, ironically, often find unacceptable.  Such is the case of the mass murders at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.

Weeping_AngelWhile there are those who are demanding immediate changes in order to “prevent” future mass murders, their solutions of gun bans and mental instability labeling only deride our individual freedoms and do nothing to address the actual problem which is that we have little to no accountability for our own behaviors in our current society.  For several generations now, we have abdicated our responsibility of raising our children to government institutions (schools, therapists, law enforcement).  No longer do we seek the counsel of our priests, clergymen, or family elders.  No longer do we allow our children to pay the consequences of their behavior.  No longer do we teach personal responsibility.  How many times have we seen the “good intentions” of giving every child an award for participation rather than teaching them how to lose?  How many times do we hear the excuse of blaming others or environment for the actions of one?  Contrarily, how few times have we heard the explanation of “life is not fair” or “everyone cannot be a star” or a reprimand of “you knew better”?

Granted my statements are for our society in general and do not apply to each and every family’s situation, but the statistics are overwhelming that show a lack of personal accountability.

Over the next months we will continue to hear varying speculation as to why a 20 year old man killed 27 people in Connecticut.  While there may be merit with many of the possible explanations for this horror; mental instability, medications or lack thereof, unsupervised access to firearms, a family unwilling to acknowledge the mental state of their child, etc., to act on one of these reasons exclusively and ignore the others will do little to affect this type of violence.  It’s the sad, unspoken truth…and that is Why It Matters.

xxx

Advertisements
Comments
  1. THE FOLLOWING IS A DISCUSSION FORWARDED TO ME FROM A READER VIA EMAIL. THIS CORRESPONDENCE IS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW REWRITING AMERICAN HISTORY AFFECTS OUR FUTURE. TO THIS WRITER, IT IS A SOBERING ILLUSTRATION OF THE CONSEQUENCE OF SOCIALISTIC-LIBERAL EDUCATION BEING FORCED UPON OUR CHILDREN. WE MUST CHOOSE TO PAY ATTENTION, LEST WE PAY THE PRICE FOR THEIR IGNORANCE LATER. ALW

    READER’S COMMENTS (1):
    April your “unspoken truth” is only partially correct. When the 2nd amendment was written, we had no organized militia. We had not really army, no national guard and no local police force. If you closely read our 2nd amendment “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” You will see the main point is that we have a militia; we had none at the time, and never envisioned that we would have the population and regulated Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, National Guard and Coast Guard to protect us. Not to mention, local Police, Sherriff and FBI. So when we speak that un-spoken, misleading the meaning of the 2nd Amendment might not be the best idea!
    D. A.

    MY RESPONSE (1):
    D. you are incorrect. Each state already had a militia long prior to the American Revolution, however they were privately funded. In regard to the Second Amendment, our Founding Fathers from both sides of thought equally were concerned that citizens be armed as they had witnessed the helplessness of citizens in European countries to deal with a tyrannical government. My next article goes into this aspect. Thanks for checking out my site!
    ALW

    READER’S RESPONSE (2):
    April, again with a practical truth, not sure where you got your PhD in history, but the 3 history professors that I have regular discussions (one is my partner) on this subject all disagree with parts of your conclusions. As I stated the militia of the day was unorganized and for the most untrained and volunteer, and yes one could make the assertion that they were privately funded, as anyone with a weapon and ammo could volunteer to be part of the militia, as could their sons, which in many cases were unarmed. So the presentation that the State Militia alone could protect the citizenry is false and as such the amendment’s need to give all citizens the right to bear arms. However, the founders of our great nation could not envision what our country would grow to be. Surely not such great cities … with that in mind they created our constitution as a living document to evolve. Part of that evolution is the need to modify the 2nd amendment to fit the technology of our day. The truth spoken or not can never be discovered with one only presents part of it. I hope in your articles you do research that goes past just proving your point and uncovers truths, even if they go against your political beliefs.
    D.A.

    MY RESPONSE (2):
    Ms. A., I thank you for reading my posts, however, I must vehemently disagree with your assertions. I research extensively prior to authoring any article and what my research reveals in the case of the Second Amendment is that the Founders were specifically concerned about citizens being able to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. I would suggest that you and your professor partners do a bit of research yourselves that goes beyond the liberal rewriting of historical facts.
    ALW

    READER’S RESPONSE (3):
    The biggest fear our founding fathers had was against the native Americans (Indians), the idea of this “tyrannical government’ is more modern history, the truth is that Britian governed us with a velvet glove, the majority of our taxes were self inflected. But the biggest disconnect you have is that our founding fathers ever envisioned the weapons 200+ years in the future. For you or anyone to propse that they ever thought the AK47 would exisit and that each citizen should have the right to own one is the real shame, my point back day one was that WAS not the intend of the 2nd Amendment. As for your suggestion that the professors with PhD’s (which since you declined to answer, can only make me assume you don’t have) are rewriting history to accommodate ones agenda liberal or otherwise … only tells me that perhaps you might be accusing them based on your own agenda. See educators become such to educate, not become well known, I wonder if you can say you have such a pure heart?
    D.A.

    MY RESPONSE (3):
    ? INDIANS? VELVET GLOVE? APPARENTLY, THIS READER HAS NEVER ACTUALLY READ AMERICAN HISTORY. CAN ANYONE SAY THE STAMP ACT? I REST MY CASE.
    ALW

  2. Well, as usual, I cannot leave well enough alone…I have read the comments by Dr. DA (this chick IS a PHD, right? OPS….well, WTF…let’s call her Dr. anyway and let the “DA” stand for itself) and I am astonished, as usual, at the lack of original thought, lack of research and the plethora of bad grammar in her woefully poor attempt to debate with Ms. Watkins.

    Shall we dissect just the last comments by Dr. DA? Okie-Dokie then…… 😉

    “The biggest fear our founding fathers had was against the native Americans (Indians)”. Now Dr. DA, you cannot truly believe that Indians were a greater worry to our fore-fathers than the English. Can you??? If we follow this reasoning, we would have declared our independence from the Iroquois Confederacy instead of the English Crown. I cannot remember seeing ANYWHERE where the Indians levied taxes, quartered soldiers or exercised naval blockades against Colonial America. But the British DID…

    She also states, “the idea of this “tyrannical government’ is more modern history, the truth is that Britain governed us with a velvet glove, the majority of our taxes were self inflected”. (Even though you are wrong Doc, don’t you mean self-inflicted? Hello spell-check!) Evidently Dr. DA has failed to READ the Declaration of Independence. If she did, you might have noticed the section that starts “The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world” and THEN lists not one, but TWENTY-SEVEN SPECIFIC instances (FACTS) of tyranny.

    Also, I guess the definition of “velvet glove” would be, in Dr. DA’s opinion, a British occupying force exceeding 75,000 troops including a MINIMUM of 30,000 hired mercenaries. Nothing says Velvet like a paid German contract killer! Add to this, 160,000+ British Naval troops pirating American vessels and blockading Colonial ports and I would be forced to disagree with Dr. DA that the British were a kindly bunch of blokes with America’s best interest at heart.

    And Doctor…regarding your asinine statement that “the majority of our taxes were self inflected”; if you were familiar with British governance (or cared to research), you would know that Parliament authorized the levying of taxation for any of the colonies of the Crown.

    Now, let’s get to the meat of this discussion…the 2nd Amendment.

    Dr. DA states, ” But the biggest disconnect you have is that our founding fathers ever envisioned the weapons 200+ years in the future. For you or anyone to propose that they ever thought the AK47 would exist and that each citizen should have the right to own one is the real shame, my point back day one was that WAS not the intent of the 2nd Amendment”. Hogwash!

    For once and for all, let me explain to everyone the real intention of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution… When government becomes tyrannical, WE THE PEOPLE have the RIGHT to use our WEAPONS to abolish the government and start a new one. I’ll go you one better even…We The People have the RESPONSIBILITY and the CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY to do this!!!!!

    I have no idea where people came up with the notion that the 2nd Amendment has ANYTHING to do with hunting or self-protection from other citizens. The 2nd Amendment has nothing whatsoever to do with these things. It ONLY addresses the ability of the governed to fight the government for their rights.

    Now Doc, you say that the Founders never envisioned AK47’s…and that may well be true. However, we had some pretty sharp cookies founding our beloved country. Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington ALL had damn good imaginations…hell, they IMAGINED a free country called the United States of America didn’t they? Now, they may not have dreamed of a weapon that could fire 30 shots per second, but I can damn well tell you that they would have one in their gun safe! What I am saying is that while they may not have imagined the devastating weapons we have created in the last 200+ years, they would DEMAND that We The People had access to the same weapons used by the military. Think about it for a second without a conservative OR liberal bias…without the same weapons as the military, what chance would We The People have against a government gone awry? NONE AT ALL! The Founding Fathers provided We The People with the RIGHT to be as well armed as the military with the 2nd Amendment!

    As a close to her uneducated comments, Dr. DA then wants to get a personal jab against Ms. Watkins. She states, “As for your suggestion that the professors with PhD’s (which since you declined to answer, can only make me assume you don’t have) are rewriting history to accommodate ones agenda liberal or otherwise … only tells me that perhaps you might be accusing them based on your own agenda. See educators become such to educate, not become well known, I wonder if you can say you have such a pure heart”? REALLY?

    I, in my many years of education, have seen a multitude of professors. While all of them had PhD’s, not all of them have the sense to open an umbrella when it rains. Regardless of what you may think, ALL educators do NOT become such to educate. Some, and probably most, wish to promote their own agenda and opinion as opposed to stating facts to their charges. Open any high school or college textbook and see how long it takes you to find a mistake or an outright lie. It will not take long. I have read many of these and have confronted your so-called “professors” with the facts before. Some will argue and some will admit the problem, depending, of course, on the veracity of their character and ethics. History is re-written every day and it is the duty of everyone to call it out and educate our children and young adults with actual facts…. not liberal OR conservative fiction!

    I have not seen where Ms. Watkins stated that she was a PhD. Why should that matter? Is research LIMITED to the hallowed PhD? God, I hope not…. because most of them are your standard, garden variety idiots, spouting opinion as fact and taking umbrage to being called out to face the facts and being found wanting. I’ll take Ms. Watkins research over that of Larry, Curly and Moe (Your 3 professors) any day of the week.

    Ms. Watkins’s column has hundreds of comments and thousands of daily readers, so evidently she is doing something right. I surmise that this something would be honesty, integrity, diligence and patriotism. What do you have?

    Sincerely,

    G Byron Barrett

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s