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.
OMG you said the M word and here comes Bravo 4.
We keep all the terrible weapons of war so that we will not be oppressed. But everyone is a pussy except for we Frozen Few.
1eight17 Militia
I'm not sure if you are speaking for a militia here - but if you are, maybe you can respond to the issue of militia inaction in the face of obvious tyranny spanning many decades?
I myself am far from inactive. If you go back to my intro post you can see where I've been and where it's taken me. I also addressed the issue myself in a recent post.
The time to respond is passing and soon it will be too late.
I see, ok. What I am expressing in my post here is an understanding that there are truly wiser and more effective ways to resolve the problems of imbalance on Earth than through violent confrontation. Every attempt to control others starts with beliefs and thoughts which are based in error and so, it follows, that through right understanding and action it is possible to transform the situation from one based in error to one based on a foundation of real integrity.
When you say that 'everyone is a pussy except for we frozen few' (setting aside that cats have claws and women's vaginas are essentially your source of life itself) - you appear to be completely ignoring/denying the essence of what I wrote in my post here. I would appreciate if you would signal if you didn't read it all because if you did read it then obviously I need to rewrite it to make it clearer.
I read it and feel that it doesn't really address the real issue with tyranny so rather than debate and circle endlessly I simply voiced my thoughts.
I see, ok - thanks for your focus here. I have already written at length about practical evolution towards heart presence and I linked to it with the intention of not constantly repeating myself. Ultimately this kind of awareness is something that needs to be experienced rather than reasoned and considered - so there is only so far I can take readers with posts of this kind.
In short though, tyranny requires both heartlessness in those who are in government AND in those who allow them to act that way. Unfortunately, as is evidenced by the extensive work of ivy league historian Carroll Quiqley - the American government (and many others) has, for at least 100 years been almost totally usurped by those who intend to make the 'democracy' nothing more than a distraction for those who believe in it's legitimacy. As such, it is a given that everyone who supports such tyrannical systems is partially or totally heartless - so therefore it also follows that the only workable solution is to evolve to heal the heartlessness. Without understanding deeply and feeling what is meant by the word 'heartlessness' it is not really possible to understand what is being said here.
My feelings about why tyrants must be dealt with violently are pretty simple. They already are in control through generations of apthetic approaches to the issue. They do not intend to release that grip and have become accustomed to utilizing the massive arsenals they have accumulated. They are killing people at an unheard of rate and they have only picked up steam. They are absolutely willing to kill to enslave us and most are too afraid of death or physical harm to stand up.
I have come to the conclusion that they are less willing to die for it than I, and will kill their pigs until they relent and set my people free.
This is definitely in need of a reread and digest. The number of times I was bobbing my head, I lost count. I will admit to having lost faith that any kind of mass awakening will happen to shift the consciousness of those who live and die by their guns.
I think that the political system in the US has sold its soul to the NRA and the price is the bullet-riddled bodies of its citizens.
If something as devastating as Sandy Hook didn't move the needle, nothing would, at least not on a collective scale. Individually? perhaps.
I have chosen to just live life as best as I can with a bit more kindness, a bit more of a desire to learn and understand. Fear is a powerful drug and when you have people in selective organizations who know how to weaponize it, the most we can do is walk away, honor the fallen and try to rise above and beyond ignorance and hatred and violence.
Yes, there are many who will not evolve in this lifetime - however, that does not mean that a more stable environment cannot be created that might support some in shifting and increase the balance overall to a more acceptable level.
The official narrative of these mass shootings is typically not the full story and I have to say, that given the research done by a lot of people and based on my own experience from the 'boston bombing' and others - I am fairly clear that some or many of them are being deliberately staged by corrupt elements of the US government and private mercenaries for their own reasons. The motive could be to install gun control or it could be to instil fear and thus increased demand for government control and weapons sales. I feel that whatever evils appear on the surface, the actual depth of the depravity is far, far deeper and worse.
If learning and being kind is what you feel you can do then that is perfect and there is no need to go beyond what feels right. It is the overpowering of feelings that is causing so much of our imbalance.
We share some fundamental convictions, it seems!
The state of heartlessness is what can also be described as fear. Without the heart, without courage, without love, fear and the mind and ego (for me they all refer more or less to the same phenomenon) can take over and the result is the coldness you speak of.
In a state of fear we are not only unable to connect to others in an open and positive way, we can also become dangerous. Fear leads to hatred, hatred to violence...
Love can overcome fear, but sometimes a sleeping heart needs to wake up before it is actually capable of loving enough to accomplish that.
Sending you much Love brother, I like what you do!
Greetings! Fear is definitely a major problem, yes. However, to heal fear itself requires a loving heart - fear is not an enemy, it is an emotional state and has a voice with a message that needs to be felt and heard. The ego is just the part of you that knows who you are - the problem is imbalance in the ego due to incorrect definitions being used and denial of real emotions.
hate is an interesting thing because it is only extreme dislike. if you really think about and feel into the situation, there's nothing wrong with extreme dislike at all. i wrote on this here. 'I hate war' is a statement that makes clear that hate does not automatically lead to violence.
I agree about the heart needing to be involved to heal fear, yes. The heart can be awakened both through intention to do so and to feel the heart fully, plus through emotional triggering to get us vibrating enough to feel the truth!
Thanks for your intentions - heartfelt resonations to you too :)
It all comes down to definitions.
We use different models and definitions, but I can see we are on the same page.
For me the statement 'I hate war.' is just a funny way of saying: 'I am afraid of war.'
We don't like to admit to our fear and therefore we give other names to it, like:
Hatred, greed, jealousy, envy, deceit and so on. For me they all have their root in fear.
There is nothing 'wrong' with fear. But if it dictates our lives, like it does today, it needs to be put in it's place.
Where fear is faced and overcome, Love unfolds it's warm embrace.
Keep that heart open, friend!
i disagree about fear. hate can actually be loving - as I demonstrated in the post i linked to. the desire to protect self does not need to involve fear - it can be the result of past experience of actually having been harmed. even a strong individual who has the capacity to deflect all attacks and thus not be fearful can still hate that they are constantly being attacked and, in fact, the extreme dislike that hate IS can actually be part of the process of defending self.. So hate is only a label to describe one end of the polarity of attraction/repulsion that is an absolute requirement of free will. without hate the mechanics of free will could not support real free will.
I think the 'bad reputation' that hate has mainly stems from judgements about what hate is and the blame that hate falsely receives based on a lack of understanding about free will mechanics.
We do disagree, indeed.
Hatred is a result of fear and fear is as opposed to Love as it gets.
Your definition of hatred as extreme dislike is not taking it out of the fear-spectrum by any means.
Anyway, I agree on the importance of opening our hearts.
Working on the heart made me realize that my hatred for 'the happy slaves and their masters who are nothing but higher slaves' was in reality fear I did not want to admit to.
Once I realized this, I was able to replace fear with Love. Changed my life.
if hatred is a result of fear then so is dislike. i dislike coffee but i don't fear it.
Why do you dislike it?
Good stuff again Ura, quite agree with your conclusions, but if you are waiting (or indeed to be fair - 'working towards') a world of healed hearts to solve gun problems, this could be some wait, and a high stack of coffins. As a quick suggestion in this response, how about practically tackling issues that contribute to the anxiety and paranoia that currently frightened people live with? This can feel like a vicious circle of course. One step may be actually having truly honest and open 'security' forces who are actually responsive to the needs of their communities, and not at the beck and call of criminal mastermind overseers in distant lairs (government offices). Oh yeah, that might mean setting up local milit... Db
Thanks! The mechanics of converting heartlessness to heart does indeed involve healing all anxieties and replacing dishonesty with integrity. The same heartlessness that causes people to be cold killers is also involved with the blind signup into military forces that are themselves operated to manifest more cold killers.
The practicalities of manifesting heart start within each of us and can quite quickly accelerate into changed policies in schools and then quite rapidly into real change on a global level. Most of us don't really have experience of the kind of transformation I am pointing at here and my heart healing series is a good starting point to come to grips with the reality of it.
It is true that many will never heal, but that will not stop those with a strong will and intent to live, from making the called for changes.
The coffins have been stacking up at ever increasing rates for a long time indeed, yet any step towards balance will improve that. There is no way to have an honest security service without the necessary internal balance and heart presence to support it. At present, those with heart presence will go nowhere near military forces since they absolutely know their heart will be injured by the process.
All quite true, and at the level of personal contact this is the only way forward. On the level of our societal engagement though we must press hard to reverse the centralisation trend, we must devolve all relevant power back to local communities. Fundamentally we have to wrest power back from the usurper psychopath class who have deliberately built this crumbling global monstrosity that is killing so many of us, human and non-human alike. I really like your work, you're one of my favourite contributors here. Db
Somehow balance of power must be found, yes! Thanks for your words of support.
@Ura-soul i think gun only allot those people those who are mentally fit! And I don't knw why should we need to gun?? I think we need to calm and peaceful and spread love to each other!
But thanks for sharing your great thought in it!
I really like to follow you:))
Thanks for your comment. The issue with limiting guns (or anything) only to those who fit a certain description - is that this means that one group or individual must judge the others, which opens the door to abuse, error and imbalance. We have a situation where 'the winners' wrote the history books and so the mainstream understanding of who we are and what is 'right' is seriously twisted. As a result, it could be easy for a truly evil group to convince the majority to go along with taking guns away from people who fit a certain profile - without that majority realising that the profile was basically 'the political opponents of the people taking the guns'.
This is exactly the reason why the constitution of the USA makes allowance for an armed population.
I do appreciate that there are some people who are a real threat if they have a gun, but it is not until they overpower the free will of others that action should be taken to correct the balance.
To be calm and peaceful absolutely requires us to accept all of our most denied and judged against feelings, such as the extreme rage that most people think they don't have, but do - in a state of denial. It is only through this heartfelt approach of self acceptance and evolution that real peace and calm can be the lived experience.
Ultimately, we do not need guns - but with a hugely imbalance society such as we experience today, it is going to take a major journey of learning before many people will put them down. We are undergoing that journey, but part of that healing journey is to stop trying to control other people.
Thanks for sharing the wonderful post @ ura-soul! Really appreciated!
You are welcome! Thanks for your kind comment. :)
hate can actually be loving !!!!!!! who said that ?
me! hate is extreme dislike. we dislike that which does us harm. love seeks to protect us and keep us safe. if something does us harm then love will do what is necessary to protect us and part of that will be a totally natural and balanced dislike. if we face extreme and malicious threats to us then it is natural for us to extremely dislike the situation and that extreme dislike is hate. so to hate something (when balance is present) is part of self preservation and free will and thus love.
This post has received a 9.09 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @ura-soul.
Genghis Khan never owned a gun nor did any of his employees. Jack the Ripper never owned a gun, Lizzie Bordon never owned a gun, Tamerlane, Ragnar Lothbrok......
Jack the ripper was never 'officially' identified, so we don't know if he owned a gun or not. I take it that your point is that those people were not known for using guns and killed anyway. That is correct and that is part of why I am explaining in some depth the process of healing the causal layers within us that cause us to kill - regardless of the weapons used.
It is simple logic and maths to identify that the invention of highly efficient weapons has resulted in an increase in violent death.
We pay a price for the second amendment. But that price is minuscule compared to the prices other nations have paid for governments having a monopoly on firearms...
Maybe so. The point of my post here is to point to a third way that solves all of the problems - but it's not something that can be voted on.
This post has received a 22.65 % upvote from @upgoater thanks to: @ura-soul.
An armed society is a polite society.
Guns are no different than any other tool in the hand of those using it, respect the tool, respect the handler of the tool.
Does a awakening need to happen more, maybe, but in spite of all the weapons in the world and in spite of all the people in the world, only a select few use the weapons to kill others and many are in self defense to keep from being killed themselves.
I don't see much evidence of politeness in much of America. I don't think South Central LA is known for politeness.
There are going to be pockets in the world, but what percentage does not use guns? Well under 1/4, 1/8, 1/32 percentage or is it even less and not more? Just because folks have a gun does not mean that is their first option. With any tool comes the responsibility of using it as it was meant to be used.
If a person is committed and predisposed to committing an act of violence on such a mass scale, the only thing that will stop them is someone prepared, trained, and capable of defending life. It’s time to tell the liberals that we are tired of being held to the mercy of the criminals and the mentally ill, while we wait for standard emergency response times.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” ― Edmund Burke