Which Makes Us Safe, Laws Or Freedom?

Many advocate that laws can make us "safe" by restricting firearms.  See exhibit 1 below. This may appear to work, but unfortunately innocent smiles don’t dissuade miscreants from forcing their will upon someone weaker. Socialists and communists (aka "progressives") advocate for disarming society despite history demonstrating that it only encourages tyranny.

But when freedoms bestowed by God are respected, multiple options for protection manifest themselves.  Exhibit 2 below illustrates a common option.  Note that it does not matter how big or strong, nor if there is one or many attackers,

because a 55 grain metallic projectile emitted at 2,800+ feet per second quickly encourages bad people to reconsider harming others:

Firearms are arguably the best tools for defending life, and they most commonly do so by only being revealed by the one threatened (as John R. Lott has documented, firearms are regularly used by private citizens to preserve life, not to take it).

Ironically, the organization which many think exists to keep us safe has actually interfered with our ability to do so.  Current infringements upon our freedom to bear arms began in 1934 (NFA under FDR).  Until then, fully automatic firearms could be purchased without any restrictions (and frequently without a sales tax) at places like hardware stores.

The public school narrative claims that “gangsters” necessitated firearm restrictions.  But we are not told that after the end of prohibition in December of 1933 (which was an abysmal failure and another great example of the perils of restricting freedom), the Bureau of Prohibition essentially lost the justification for its existence, so in 1934, instead of being dissolved, it was given purview over the NFA and it eventually became the A TF.  Additional freedoms were infringed upon in 1968 (Gun Control Act under Johnson) and 1986 (FOPA under Reagan, aka the "Firearm Owners Protection Act" - funny how a legislation's title frequently belies what it really does).

But despite attempts to infringe upon what God has bestowed, what freedom remains has continued to improve our lives thru innovation. This is true in all areas of life. In the automotive industry, three wheeled vehicles provide options not available on four wheeled vehicles because of mandates. It’s also true with firearms.

The 1934 NFA unconstitutionally restricted the barrel and overall length of rifles in addition to who could possess one that was fully automatic (one had to pay $200 [a considerable sum in 1934] to not have their right to full auto infringed).  In 1986, Ronald Reagan, much lauded for supposedly defending freedom, imposed further restrictions severely limiting the availability of full auto firearms with FOPA (the "Gipper" speaks out of both sides of his mouth here).

But freedom thankfully finds ways to prevail. An arm brace instead of a butt stock allows the firearm below to meet the classification of a pistol, so barrel and overall length requirements do not apply.  In addition, the folding mechanism makes the firearm easier to carry and the incorporation of tuned triggers can somewhat approximate the behavior of full auto:

In places where fewer infringements on firearms exist, violence is uncommon compared to places like Chicago, Baltimore and others where contempt for freedom is prevalent. So if you really want safety, advocate for the restoration of freedom.