Hey Senator Casey – Consider This As You Line Your Pockets And Take Our Guns

In yesterday’s Daily Rant titled “Senator Robert Casey’s Closet Secret,” I inadvertently labeled Democrat Senator Robert P. Casey of Pennsylvania a Republican — not that there is a dime’s bit of difference between the two parties these days, regardless of what Republicans try to claim. Casey’s dirty little secret is that he is committed to supporting Diane Feinstein’s’ bill S. 150 that will deprive Americans of their Second Amendment rights.

Before I get to the heart of the matter I wish to address, let me say this. My rant yesterday was prompted by Casey’s two-faced political cholera he wrote to my friend who holds elected office on the local level in PA. That said, my response to my friend who shared Casey’s letter with me was the equivalent of a George Foreman straight right to the bridge of Casey’s nose. And I was right to do so.

But it was the great number of people who wrote me yesterday saying that they had received the same letter verbatim that calcified my initial remarks. Casey is a disgrace to his father and to the Catholic Church, but for him to have his staff “press send” and jettison off the same canned response to potentially thousands of PA residents who wrote him in good faith as their representative is a condemnable act equal to the most grievous betrayal.

But that’s not why I’m revisiting Casey’s betrayal of those he supposedly represents. It’s because, as I and others have repeatedly pointed taking guns out, of the hands of law-abiding gun owners, sportsmen and enthusiasts is foolish and will not in any way limit or reduce the number of criminal acts inflicted upon helpless unarmed citizens. On the contrary, it will increase the number of violent criminal acts that are perpetrated upon an unarmed citizenry. But fools like Casey refuse to acknowledge what statistics clearly point out, i.e., that the idea of taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens simply gives criminals the upper hand.

And it was a letter I received from a woman yesterday morning that drove the point home. My friend, who is now a single mother, wrote me the following (I’ve redacted the name of her late son and late spouse):
“Just a thought…Given what happened to [my son] I’m not supporting the gun control issues. Maybe another aspect to look into is the follow up on some of these domestic abuse situations where they do nothing to the abusers but a slap on the hand. It’s not the gun issues .. They will still find the guns… It’s the fact that the courts don’t follow through with the probation officers or the anger management classes and continue to let them see the children etc even after the fact that the Abuse is evident. A lot of homicides stem from the domestic end, nobody followed up on [my husband]…not to mention, I told the judge he threatened to kill my son if I called the police.. They did nothing… Maybe if they were to do their jobs we wouldn’t have the issues with them killing people. They should’ve been locked up due to violations of a PFA or threats on a life… Start where a lot of problems lie… In our courts etc. as I said criminals will still find a gun if they want to. To think a stricter ban will stop the killings is a joke. There’s no trace to [my husband’s] gun… Do the job in the courts with some of these people. Anyway…Just a thought.”

The back story to my friend’s comments is as follows. For years, she suffered the most brutal physical and psychological abuse I have ever been made aware of. It is important for me to repeat this. The accounts she shared with me of the beatings, etc. that she suffered even now make me wince. She was literally held hostage from her family and former friends. The courts were aware of her plight, and they were well aware of her late husband’s criminal history.

But their idea to ensure her safety and that of their two-year old son was to have her fill out Protection From Abuse (PFA) papers. It wasn’t the PFAs that ultimately stopped his abuse of her. The physical abuse stopped the night her husband, armed with a gun that was stolen in another state, murdered her two-year old son and took his own life — as she waited outside the door to pick her son up — who the courts had dictated her husband had a right to see despite overwhelming evidence of the threat he presented.

Here’s my point and hers. Putting stricter controls on the law abiding and taking guns out of their hands will no more stop persons fueled with rage and homicidal thoughts frequently due to the side effects of the psychotropic drugs dispensed like candy by doctors and psychiatrists — anymore than a PFA protects a woman (or man) from abuse and/or death.

The way to stop them is to stop them. But just as the courts would rather push compliance of that which has historically been proven to fail — so too with Casey and those like him who are lining their pockets with money from Big Pharma; it’s easier to punish the law abiding and ignore the criminals and the insane.

But what does my friend and those like her know? They don’t have access to the protections, armed security, and benefits that her tax dollars provide for him to deprive her and others of their Constitutional rights.
*********************

AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM MYCHAL: “Thanks for reading this article! If you enjoyed it, please sign up to receive new articles via email by clicking here.  We HATE spam as much as you do and we promise to NEVER, EVER, sell your information to anyone EVER! We will only share with you ideas and information that we feel is worthy of our subscribers. Remember, just click here to sign up for our email alerts. Thanks!”