With every new mass shooting, the tensions raise regarding the issue of gun control in America and elsewhere. Those who choose peace and absolutely reject violence will understandably prefer that all guns are removed from society - but as has been pointed out, the usual methods for removing guns will typically involve an enforcement that itself pretty much requires guns on the part of the 'enforcers' such as police and military. In addition, the USA constitution makes space for armed militias to protect the people from corrupt governments...
I intend to share here the only workable solution that I am aware of.
The basics of the issue of gun control vs. no gun control
The basic argument in support of everyone having free access to (all) guns is that to prohibit weapons to some people and not to others is to create a form of imbalance and unfairness that opens the door to outright tyranny and enslavement of the unarmed groups by the armed groups. As long as guns are present on Earth it is logical to say that guns are needed to protect the rest of us from whoever else may have a gun.
The basic argument in support of gun control (the limiting of access or outright banning of some or all guns in public hands) is that the government has it's own police and military who are (allegedly) highly trained in using the weapons safely and who are monitored to prevent abuses. Therefore, we should trust them to do their job professionally and to protect us from others who may have guns 'illegally' - the theoretical outcome being that there will be less gun related deaths/injuries since the rest of us will have less guns and less opportunity to shoot each other.
Problems with having no gun control
If everyone has free access to powerful weapons, it follows that there will be more gun related injury and death than if they do not. This is indeed what we see, since - for example - gun related crime in America is far higher than in Great Britain, where powerful guns are much more difficult to acquire and not part of the general culture at all.
Living in a culture where guns are a normal part of every day life means that people who would otherwise have never used a gun will feel compelled to also buy a gun to be safe. This creates a kind of arms race where more and more weapons are in circulation and at higher levels of power and capacity than would otherwise be the case - meaning greater potential for death and injury (both accidental and deliberate).
A culture that is saturated by guns must also be an enlightened society to prevent carnage and suffering being the result of all the guns - it's no kind of protection to be around people who will kill each other just for 'looking at each other funny' like a 'wild west' movie. However, what we are seeing through the state controlled education systems and mass media systems is not a promotion of genuine enlightenment (enlightenment meaning 'increase of genuine, deep and complete understanding') - but instead we see a general dumbing down, where deep details are denied and replaced with half truths and outright lies on a daily basis.
It also needs to be pointed out that the American government has consistently acted without integrity for at least the last 60 years and have been exposed as being highly criminal in numerous different ways. Many have pointed out that the actions of some of the groups and individuals equate to real treason and tyranny against the American people - and yet, the 'armed militias' have not yet delivered on the promise of being a powerful enough force to fully stop the criminality. Partly this is due to the huge militarisation of the American police forces and an uncertainty of what would occur if militias acted to support the constitution and remove a corrupt government. Most people do not want a civil war that might result in millions being killed - however, if being heavily armed is not stopping tyranny - then the constitutional argument for being armed is somewhat muted.
Problems with having gun control
A society that has no weapons, it could be said, leaves itself open to attack from outside and this is the basic premise of militaries within nations. However, militaries and police forces are typically not of much use when protecting nations from corruption within their own government since these agencies are trained to follow orders and are ruled to some extent by a culture of fear that seeks to control them so as to use them in certain ways. People are typically uneasy about challenging 'their superiors' in the artificial power hierarchies and so even great crimes committed by governments go unreported and justice is not done.
For these reasons - and more - it can be argued that it is essential that if a government has weapons, then the people outside of the government should also be allowed to have weapons to protect themselves from their own government.
Since the total disarmament of all people everywhere is a concept that is well beyond the capacity of a single government - it follows that people are going to want and need ways to feel protected from others who may decide to become violent and use guns against them.
When it comes to one group deciding who should and should not have guns (or do just about anything else), there is no satisfactory way to reach a resolution that everyone feels good about - since who is to say who is right and who is not? Even if one group can be logically proven to be promoting the best decision, there will always be differences in thought among different groups and it is not right for the mindset of one group to be forced on another (which is part of why 'the war on drugs' is an absurdity).
The common thread - Free Will
What connects all this together is FREE WILL. Both those who are for and those who are against gun control are claiming to be representing the best interests of freedom (free will). So what is in the middle of this paradox that we can learn from and evolve from?
As I have written many times already, denial of free will is at the root of all of our problems on Earth. We deny free will in many ways without even realising until we learn certain rarely understood truths that are only now becoming more widely accepted.
It is easy to see how gun control is in opposition to free will, since if our free will is to have a gun and someone says that we cannot, then our will is feeling denied and controlled. So, from a free will perspective, the question becomes:
"How can we have a society without gun control that is also safe?".
As with most of our problems right now, the answers can be found through an increased understanding of the nature of free will and how to be fully respectful of it's sacred purpose in life. It is only through increasing understanding of free will and increasing respect for free will that real balance will be found and it is real balance that keeps us safe. There would be no 'unbalanced school shooters' if all were balanced - by definition.
Balance is defined as 'no part or aspect is overpowering any other aspect'.
It is not balanced to use psychotropic drugs to try to squash symptoms of depression as they work by overpowering subtle organs in the brain. Many if not all of the mass shooters in America's recent past were taking prescription psychotropic drugs.
It is also not balanced to create a society where people feel the need to carry guns with them into public places just to feel safe to some degree.
It is also not balanced to deny the voices that inform us of real solutions to problems and this is what occurs regularly in the minds of those who are psychologically attached to their guns and a certain 'macho' way of thinking that says that they alone are the 'saviours' of justice and 'goodness' - never allowing in alternative pathways to a real and lasting peace that does not involve guns.
It is not balanced to deny the needs and feelings of the body by claiming that real peace will only be found after death when God or Jesus welcomes us into their magical home.
Balance means meeting ALL needs in the present moment and denying nothing. In the case of guns in society, it is our feelings of fear and distrust for others in society that ultimately lead us to want to use them in many cases and it is other forms of spiritual imbalance that cause others among us to 'go crazy' and become a real threat to us - as apparently occurred in Las Vegas and so many other places in recent years. No amount of weapon training or weapon sales will make up for the failure to address the issues at their causal level and in this case, the causality ALWAYS involves HEARTLESSNESS. Once we understand and heal heartlessness collectively, many of these problems will end.
What is Heartlessness?
I have written on this in great detail already - I suggest reading through my heart healing series for more information. In short, heartlessness is a 'state of being' whereby our heart is not being allowed to fulfil it's role as balancer within our thoughts and emotions. If we consciously allow our heart to bond our thoughts and feelings before we act and before we think further - we can always come to a place of balance within ourselves that respects free will and which feels good. In a society that denied this fact long ago and which typically never even speaks of this level of depth of understanding it is very easy to completely deny the heart's function and the heart's voice inside of us.
When we deny the heart, we have thoughts that lack emotional intuition - which are cold (hearted). We can also create disconnected emotions through heartlessness, which lack the guidance of thought and clear insight and which may then go on to be the foundation of 'road rage' events that 'come out of nowhere'. Such events are triggered and do not 'come out of nowhere' at all - they are examples of denied rage exploding that the body can no longer hold in denial.
Through cultivation of new heart, we process old emotions and find a real balance. It is ONLY through this approach that we can solve our problems - you only need to try it and not judge it to find out for yourself.
There will be many who will judge these words as being 'weak', 'delusional' and other such judgements - but they are none of that. I suggest you consider this fact before jumping to any conclusions:
The French word for heart is cœur - and it is from that word that we get the English word 'Courage'. The literal origin of real courage is our heart.
Conclusion
It may be difficult or even impossible to envision a world that is so healed and balanced that no-one ever had the thought to use a gun - but it is possible, none the less. If we think back to the barbaric times of hundreds of years ago where people from Europe looked at the tribes from other parts of the world and then viewed them as 'evil' or worse just because they lived without clothes and hunted in ways that seemed primitive to them - we can imagine that to them it might have seemed impossible that these entire societies could be 'evolved' to live in houses and in a way that Europeans considered 'balanced'.
Although the reality is that the European way of living is far from balanced and nearly all of us have a long way to go to truly call ourselves evolved and fully enlightened, the fact is that deeply engrained social patterns can and do evolve - so we only need to learn now how to do so in a conscious way that increases heart balance and thus that also increases respect for free will and the sacredness of life. That way is found only through the heart.
Wishing you well,
Ura Soul
Buy My T-Shirts, Gifts & Other Clothing Here.
