Neurologists’ review asks: is Gun Control really about People Control?

Wednesday in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Defender General Matthew Valerio said laws like the proposed S30, restricting gun possession in some public places, have little effect on gun crime. Nevertheless, S30 sponsor Phil Baruth (D-Chittenden) rejected the suggestion that violation of his proposed law be downgraded to a civil violation, similar to a traffic ticket. He insisted on criminal sentencing for people found guilty of carrying guns in hospitals, the State House, child care facilities and other buildings.

The following is the abstract of an October, 2019 study, written by two neurologists and published on the National Institutes of Health website, entitled “Is Gun Control really about People Control?” It is not primarily a medical discussion. Rather it offers an exhaustive review of media and scholarly articles rebutting some of the more common rationales for government gun control. Our thanks to Stumpjumper802 for sending this link our way. – Editor

Is Gun Control really about People Control?

by Drs. James Ausman and Miguel Faria

The Second Amendment of the USA Constitution states: “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.” Today around the USA and the world some people are advocating the removal of guns from the citizens, called “Gun Control,” as the solution to violent crime that they associate with guns in the hands of the public, contrary to what the Second Amendment states.

This review provides a factual background to the debate about the issues surrounding the arguments for and against “Gun Control.” The paper documents many factors that lead to violent crimes committed by people, and the means used to cause violent crimes cover the history of human civilization.

Dr. James Ausman

They include weapons of all types, bombs, toxic substances, vehicles of many kinds, and planes, all to cause the death of others. Some who commit or threaten violent crime against others are emotionally disturbed and in many cases are known to the police through screening systems. Family dysfunction, alcohol and drug abuse, an incessant stream of media and entertainment featuring gun violence, and an educational system that does not equip the young with the proper civic and ethical principles to deal with life’s challenges all contribute to violent behavior using guns and other lethal means.

With this background of multiple factors leading to the commission of violent crimes against others, the focus has been concentrated on banning firearms from public ownership rather than understanding the reasons for this criminal behavior. Why? There is the overwhelming evidence that disarming the public from using firearms will not reduce violent crimes and will render people defenseless.

Dr. Miguel Faria

Other facts indicate that allowing citizens to carry arms will prevent or reduce violent crimes. The debate over Gun Control has become politicized and emotionally based, because the real goal is not stated. In respected scientific journals and in the media, factual information about the causes and prevention of violent deaths has been misrepresented or is blatantly false. Using censorship, the medical press and the mass media have refused to publish articles or print opposing opinions such as those supporting the rights of citizens to bear arms.

There is evidence that tax-exempt foundations and wealthy individuals are financially supporting Gun Control efforts with the goal of disarming the public to establish a centrally controlled government and to eliminate the US Constitution. It is obvious that in the rapidly changing world we need to find answers to the many factors behind Violent Crime in which guns are used. That will take time and patience.

In the meantime, is there a gray area for compromise in the Guns and Violence issue? Yes, logically, from all the evidence presented in this review, citizens should be encouraged to carry arms for self, family, and fellow citizen protection, and as a check on government, a right guaranteed by the constitution and endowed by our God-given natural right. The challenges facing us are multifaceted. Is Gun Control really about People Control?

People Control is the real purpose of depriving people of the right to possess arms for self-defense.

Recent increases in violence seem not to be random events, but events that are used to cascade into more laws and more government intervention. Elimination of or circumventing the Second Amendment removes the fear of the collectivist authoritarian leaders that the citizens will rise against them with their firearms.

At the same time, eradication of Freedom of Speech is already muzzling certain conservative media and website outlets, a practice the Media are now strangely supporting. The eventual elimination of Freedom of Speech, which is a collectivist goal, in the end will shock all of the Media.

The Media are supporting its own destruction. Is Media Control the solution or is Media Responsibility to objectively report the Truth and to protect the people and the Constitution that grants the right to Free Speech, a better answer?

The real goal of the gun control movement is to establish a governmental system that is centrally controlled and to overthrow Rule by the People or their Constitutional Republic. The issue is not about Crime Control either because we are seeing that the only way to reduce rampant crime is to arm the good citizens, as there are not enough police to prevent, much less, stop all crimes.

Click here to read this article in its entirety.

Categories: Gunrights

Tagged as:

3 replies »

  1. Bingo !!! I would put it this way, I am sure that most people read this here, have heard the old saying “an armed society is a polite society”. I would like to propose that the politicians under the “Golden Dumb” that propose these bills subscribe to a different rule which states, “an unarmed society is a compliant society”.

    • Double Bingo: “…the only way to reduce rampant crime is to arm the good citizens, as there are not enough police to prevent, much less, stop all crimes.”

      Mutually assured destruction is mutually assured peace. Everything is relative. Deterrence works.

  2. Triple Bingo,The experts and Vermont Legislators should read the 2nd amendment of the US Constitution and Article 16 of the Vermont State Constitution and this should put and end to the endless debate for this matter was settled a long time ago!! Our Vermont Legislators need to focus all there attention on helping Vermonters out of an overtaxed bankrupt state,and most of all trust God and the constitution and the true voice of the people! They need to remember ,they work for us,and not we for them!True and just leadership is horizontal,and does not lord over its people!!

Leave a Reply