A scientific principle is a statement or algorithm which predicts natural behavior in response to some stimulus. The law of gravity predicts that when an object is released from a height, it will continuously accelerate downward. The law of conservation of momentum predicts that an impacted billiard ball will assume the momentum of the striking cue ball. Such laws of nature may apply to physics, chemistry, biology, and even human nature.
Among the laws of human nature, the world now has a new scientific principle. Every scientific principle needs the name of some egomaniac attached to it. Barry Soetoro (AKA, Barack Obama) never articulated this principle, and I’m sure he wishes it didn’t hold true. But he did provide the first wide-scale validation of the principle, so he’s the egomaniac that deserves credit for it – Soetoro’s Law it is. It states: Increasing gun control causes increasing gun ownership.
Soetoro’s Law holds true because of attributes inherent in every human being. We have an innate desire to survive, and an embedded understanding that we may legitimately defend ourselves to that end. When threatened: we fight back, and it is righteous that we do so.
Our founders called yearnings that spring from the human heart, inalienable rights. Rights instilled upon us by our creator. In recognition of that, they articulated a right to self-defense in our Constitution. The 2nd Amendment is an acknowledgment that we have a right to defend ourselves and our countrymen from abuse. But they recognized that the Constitution was not the source for that right. God is the source. The Constitution is merely a promise, sworn to by all high officials, to defend that right. So much for promises made by the government.
In addition, our founders recognized that the right of self-defense applies personally and collectively. We are righteous in defense of ourselves, our family, our community, and our nation – all the things that define our way of life.
As such, we have an innate defensive response to threats. When bullies emerge in our presence, we learn to fight. When our political leaders express tyrannical leanings, we protest. When emboldened dictator wannabes threaten to disarm us, we react as Soetoro’s Law predicts – we start arming ourselves. When we are threatened as we are now – by bullies in office, wielding the power of government to become tyrants – gun sales reach all-time highs.
With our current state of technology, firearms are the most obvious choice for both individual and collective defense. they are neither good nor evil. They are merely useful tools. However, they are instruments specifically designed to provide equity in conflict. Firearms are the only tool currently available that renders the size and strength of combatants irrelevant. Guns provide combat parity between a 90-pound woman and a 300-pound man – even if the man is also armed (all else being equal). Firearms are also the only tool that will give pause to a government intent on subjugating its people.
Of course a scientific theory is only some guy’s guess until proven. Soetoro’s Law is no exception. It isn’t considered a predictive principle – or law, if you will – until it is validated through test or observation. And the validation had better be more robust than that for anthropogenic climate change – which for twenty years has been predicting human extinction in ten years.
Validation is where President “We are the change” comes in. He provided observable proof of the law’s predictive accuracy. When President Obama demanded enhanced gun control, it wasn’t a benign request from a statesman committed to harmony and social order. It was a demand from a “Chicago way” community organizer, who specialized in fomenting hate, conflict, and distrust to advance his agenda.
As if to prove that Obama’s triumph of gun sales was no fluke, President “Return to normalcy” stepped up to provide independent verification. Joe Biden has also requested gun control – for the public welfare.
Except Joey from Scranton is no defender of our constitutional rights. His administration is marked by
- Censorship (social media collusion),
- Dehumanizing political opponents (“semi-fascist MAGA Republicans”),
- Usurping our medical decisions (vaccine mandates),
- Cancelling our property rights (eviction moratorium),
- Weaponizing the DOJ (political prosecutions), and
- Threatening civilians with the military (“they’ll need a few F15s”).
Americans didn’t trust that he had our best interests in mind. Go figure. Gun sales skyrocketed again. Those gun sales are especially high among the Jewish after Joe expressed more concern about Islamophobia than anti-Semitism – after Jews suffered the largest single day loss of life since the Holocaust. Soetoro’s Law held true, again – big time.
There is also a corollary that follows from Soetoro’s Law. Since we have an inalienable right to self-defense, and firearms are the best means to neutralize the advantages of aggressors, it follows that there is no legitimate reason to limit the access of guns to the law abiding.
Therefore, if the government – which is sworn to protect our rights – attempts to limit our access to the tools of self-defense, its motives are questionable. Limiting access of the law abiding to the necessary tools, is defacto advocating an unfair advantage for criminals, thugs, and politicians – but I repeat myself.
Those suggesting that our ability to defend ourselves be limited, are either dangerously naïve, or subversively malicious. Hence, the corollary is that we rightly interpret calls for our disarming as threats to our wellbeing. We get it. People calling for disarmament are prepping the battlefield for some less than pleasant future initiative.
Our founders understood this implication of the law – even if they never heard it stated as such. They knew that there is no valid reason to limit our ability to defend ourselves from the criminal in the street, or the criminal in office.
Thomas Jefferson’s words ring true to all freedom loving Americans interested in self-preservation.
What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.
There is no legitimate reason for our government to limit our access to the instruments of self-defense. Therefore, attempts to do so, must be presumed nefarious.
We have come to see that the demand for gun control is the rattle before the snake strikes. When we hear that rattle, we don’t face the snake empty handed. We chose parity (or superiority) over disparity. Soetoro’s Law comes into play, and we gun up.
It does make me wonder about the customary interpretation of the 2nd Amendment though – and I’m not even a Supreme Court justice with a penumbra or emanation in my pocket. When the founders wrote:
… the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Was it an order or an observation. Were the founders telling government officials: Don’t you dare try to infringe. Or were they saying: It’s impossible to infringe. Try it and see what happens. Soetoro’s Law is what happens.
Author Bio: John Green is a political refugee from Minnesota, now residing in Idaho. He has written for American Thinker, and American Free News Network. He can be followed on Facebook or reached at email@example.com.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA