The Politics of Distraction

**Crimefree** · 09-12-2009, 21:04

The politics of distraction

To understand the how and why of gun control means you have to understand the politics of distraction.

I have in the past mentioned this ploy many times but possibly nobody actually places any credibility in it or any importance to this ploy.

This is the dummies guide to the politics of distraction.

Nobody can argue that the ANC government has failed to control crime.

The ANC government cannot admit this or it would be seen as incompetent and uncaring of citizen’s safety. That would translate to a direct loss of confidence in the government and more importantly for government, a LOSS of popularity and VOTES.

Since an admission of failure is out of the question, government needs a scapegoat, someone or something else to take the blame and responsibility and draw the publics attention away from its failure to control crime.

What better scapegoat than GUNS causing crime for the following reasons;

1 There are few gun owners and even if they complain this is a small percentage of the total government support base.

2 It is very easy to connect guns and crime since many crimes are committed using guns.

3 The public support a ban on guns

4 Gun owners have no political organization or lobby organization to hinder any policy to shift the blame.

5 Gun owners are not likely to figure out a response to the blame since they will be so busy trying to protect their good name and reputation.

6 Gunfree South Africa has already done much work in instilling fear and hate of guns in the public. Gun Control organizations can partner government and define policy, laws and strategy.

7 No other country has failed with this method and it has a 100% success rate.

Now you have to ask yourself and connect a few dots guessing what government means by firearm owners don't have or know a response? ie firearm owners are clueless fools and no danger to this ploy and government has proof of that.

What is government doing - shifting the blame of uncontrolled crime to guns and gun owners? This justifies a policy of increased control and even a complete ban before the ploy backfires. By that time everybody will have forgotten the promises made and government can find a new scapegoat.

What are firearm owners and organizations doing - defending firearm owners pride, good name, reputation, good behaviour, record of safety.... and attacking the laws produced to implement the ploy.

The simplistic answer most will see is - there is nothing we can do.

The only viable answer is - shift the blame back where it belongs on governments failure to control crime.

That means gaining the publics support so the reaction government feared and neutralised is returned and remains very real. It's a lifetime job.

Are the SAPS spinning their wheels due to hundreds of reason mostly because of poor management and policy - government policy and interference with the operation of the SAPS. This includes removing the expertise, lack of suitable training, lack of selection of suitable candidates, strangulation of funding and resources, misdirection of funding, manpower and resources, appointment of comrades to oversee the SAPS, tolerance of corruption, crime, incompetence, arrogance, inefficiency....

Government is misdirecting the SAPS into a policy of chase guns instead of crime. Government is diverting public attention and blame from its failed policy and incompetence to that of firearm owners and their possessions.

By all means challenge government in court, all bad laws deserve no less but that is not the reason to fund it. Publicity to shift the blame back to government is. If that is not done then the court case will be a complete failure because it will not address the ploy of shifting the blame.

Do the good work but if you can't make it useful to shifting the blame back to government for placing the public in danger, then it is a waste of money and resources.

Then you are going to find out what can come back and bite you in the rear. To do this useless thing, you told firearm owners you were going to win a great battle, win the fight and win the war. When this is seen by firearm owners as changing nothing you will have disillusioned them, disappointed them and alienated them because you will not care that they have not gained You will try to move on to the next thing you think will help and urge firearm owners to support whatever that is. Do not be surprised when less and less are fooled by the false promises you will make to get their support.

In the end firearm owners and firearm organizations will have done exactly as government expected and relied on to shift the blame. It has never failed before why should it now? Government kills two birds with one stone. It removes any government’s greatest fear, an armed population and government comes out of it smelling of roses.

The choice is yours. Defend firearm ownership and firearm owners or shift the blame back where it belongs. Its not black and white and both work together but the MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT, SHIFTING THE BLAME cannot be relegated to second place or ignored as it is now.

**FrankH** · 09-12-2009, 22:51

Thanks CF for the input, good post.

**flysouth** · 10-12-2009, 14:22

I follow crimefree's advice constantly in postings online that I make - comments on news stories etc.

It IS the best and probably the most effective way to fight the FCA - and the court cases are of course important too.

I will comment on any event where guns are involved - an armed robbery etc, like the one that happened yesterday with 15 men (a platoon?) attacking the Hyde Park Shopping Centre - armed with AKs and R5s.

Such news stories present a perfect opportunity to hammer the drum of public safety NOT being served at all by government actions to date. Those actions include the FCA itself which has not reduced crime one iota.

The argument I use is that reducing the number of civilian firearms in licenced ownership gives and has given aid and encouragement to criminals, since the likelihood of SAPS actually meeting up with criminals in the course of such as attack as mentioned above is remote, whereas the certainty that ordinary citizens WILL meet these armed thugs is GUARANTEED! Criminals know this.

When those citizens are disarmed by government edict, citizens who by admission of the SAPS present no threat to society as a result of being licenced owners, then only one thing can result - more armed attacks.

Most people cannot see this clearly - they simply do not think it through, especially those who do not 'like' guns in general. Those same people of course will happily call an armed protection service or the SAPS when they themselves are threatened. Human nature in operation!

**Crimefree** · 11-12-2009, 09:11

Originally Posted by flysouth

I follow crimefree's advice constantly in postings online that I make - comments on news stories etc.

It IS the best and probably the most effective way to fight the FCA - and the court cases are of course important too.

I will comment on any event where guns are involved - an armed robbery etc, like the one that happened yesterday with 15 men (a platoon?) attacking the Hyde Park Shopping Centre - armed with AKs and R5s.

Such news stories present a perfect opportunity to hammer the drum of public safety NOT being served at all by government actions to date. Those actions include the FCA itself which has not reduced crime one iota.

Excellent advice and thanks for all the help and support you give. This is exactly what is needed from many people, a public face. That needs support of reporting such publication, material to write and think about, art work for printed stuff, -- workers of equal and vital importance to help make the wheels turn.

If we the firearm owner cannot or even refuse to understand that public safety and what the public think determines our ability to own firearms we may as well go hand them in now. It is that simple.

If firearm owners are willing to ignore this as unimportant and of no consequence to themselves then we will lose no matter what else we do.

It's not rocket science, its common sense - no government will go against public sentiment if there is strong feelings and majority support.

Every previous attempt at protecting firearm owners rights and ability to own firearms has failed because the dots to public support were not connected.

I ask one simple question only. Why does anyone think GFSA spends more then 1 million per year on public education to hate and fear guns? Please note 1million does not represent the total spend because gun control funds many other organisations such as ISS, Saferworld, INANSA, GCA....

Protect your public image at all costs. Either throw a similar amount of money at public education or every firearm owner makes an effort. This is not a one man job, it is the responsiblility of every firearm owner if they wish to remain a firearm owner.

Make up your mind what you would like to be. Armed and have the ability to defend yourself and loved ones or a helpless victim. The choice is yours as is the responsibility for making it.