Tag Archives: gun control

Christchurch: A Crisis of Governance

This week, a twenty-something man in Christchurch, New Zealand chose to commit mass murder. He was radicalized by his embraced choice of hate in the essential tripartite including love and indifference; in his case, this metastasized into an ideology of white supremacy. True to form, he then targeted The Other as scapegoats for his dissatisfaction. A hundred Muslims in two separate mosques paid the price of his homicidal rage, half of those with their lives.

That something like this should occur in New Zealand is an anomaly, for the country in a given year usually sees a like number of homicides as a total. Times are changing, and we can only trace back through the foibles of human nature in an attempt to determine why.

To have such an event occur in a place called Christchurch is a mocking irony of the spirit who commands such things, as he is the enemy of Christ, the Father, and all the mission of heaven. The enemy is he who opposes a portfolio of life with inspirations of his own. Those manifest in works of death instead.

Multiculturalism is the rebellion against natural law now ravaging national identities across Europe. It purports to enhance the social fabric in places such as New Zealand through magical thinking invoked via its goddess Diversity … but diversity in itself is not a bad thing. Diversity of experience lends strength to a commonality of purpose. Diversity of perspective can enhance clarity, and through the gift of foresight produce wisdom in the ability to anticipate consequences. What diversity cannot do is promote harmony between incontrovertible world views. This, unfortunately, is the place where New Zealand arrived by importing Islam into the West under the auspices of charity.

Islam, properly considered a seventh-century warlord’s ideology of conquest and subjugation, seeks to control every aspect of its adherent’s life. This includes its founder’s twisted Muhammadan theology and proscribed system of worship, with doctrines in which one’s sense of humanity must be overridden in deference to decrees of its prophet. Shedding blood from the infidel and embracing zeal to the point of martyrdom in holy war are fixtures there, making the creed wholly incompatible with tolerance and self-determination comprising staples of Occidental philosophies of governance. Muslims may often be insular, arrogant, and supremacist themselves; their influx being targeted by a similarly afflicted personality is unsurprising, perhaps even predictable.

Secular governance, though, considering all religion as mindless superstition, failed to consider the cultural ramifications of allowing large-scale Islamic migration into the West. Faithlessness not only forgoes the wisdom available to a reverent perspective but fails to grasp, through an inattentiveness of understanding, the depth of the conflict its policies engender.

Attempts to navigate the resulting and ideologically inescapable series of conceptual traps follow, and run to an inevitable end of systemic collapse in the harsh reset of natural law. At best, the consequences of mixing Islam and western culture is friction between their divergent answers to essential questions. Friction produces heat, and as humankind has known since Paleolithic times, such builds into flame from tinder.

Multicultural emphasis is the tinder of authoritarianism. The ensuing cultural conflict is its spark, and incidents such as Christchurch comprise flame. Once a fire is burning out of control, opportunists acquire momentum they leverage to affect change.

Centralizing power requires its subject to cede self-governance to the authority of the state, and personalities who crave to be at the top of an organizational chart for just such an arrangement have few qualms over exploiting incidents such as the carnage of Christchurch. Opportunities, in their secular, inhumane, and pragmatic outlook, evoke opportunism. Already, the Prime Minister of New Zealand is assuming that further restrictions on civilian firearms ownership are a forgone conclusion.

Firearms ownership did not produce the massacres of Christchurch. Those were committed by an unhinged individual overstepping his authority, much in the same way freedoms in New Zealand could now be restricted through more refined parliamentary procedures. In both examples, we see transgressions conducted by those who presume they have the right to do such things.

The former act of tyranny was perpetrated in a homicidal outburst, while the latter would come about following a long, slow aggregation of centralized authority already presumed to be soon abandoned by a submissive citizenry. Those are differences in optics only, stemming from the same assumptive mindset. Should good people in New Zealand afterward insist on owning effective means of protecting themselves against illegitimate, large-scale, and emergent threats to life and liberty, they would then be dutifully shot down by responding units of heavily armed delegates. Iron-handed governance relishes nothing more than exemplary enforcement of its policies.

Secular government, unbound by a vigilant citizenry, excels at creating problems it then proposes to solve by granting itself more authority. Power accumulating in that construct attracts personalities more given to ruling than serving, and there is nothing in observations of human nature or the study of history to suggest otherwise. Modern implementations of the democratic process are a relative footnote in the history of governance, much of which was written in bloodier fonts set by the stained and callused hands of authoritarianism.

Those dark days of history may well recur, of course. The fallen nature of human beings, elevated in their own sight by the deceiving voice of God’s enemy, assures such times are always attempting to stage a comeback. The scale of past state-sponsored depredations makes the toll out of tragedies such as Christchurch pale in comparison.

Hopefully enough ears still listen to encouraging voices—such as mine—touting the benefits of courage, faith, and virtue over the embrace of degrading philosophies. Hysterical promotion of the theory that human beings really shouldn’t be allowed to run around unmanaged, unmonitored, and unsupervised is an attribute no rational person should seek to empower.

Lit by the lamp of valid faith, we can see ourselves cast in a more noble light:  servants of a higher authority than any state: as messengers responsible for something more than ourselves and the state of our own souls. Every faithful person is a minister bound over to the edification of others not so far along.

Whether the inclination of those is to accept any lesser status promoted by secular perspectives of statists and collectivists, or submit to the assumptive dictates of theocrats, the exit strategies for avoiding servitude are the same. Question everything. Deconstruct the false premise. Dedicate intellect to determine the actual state of affairs, and nurture cultivated awareness, whose gift is the clear vision that results.

Most of all, hold to account those whom you elevate into positions of authority to operate within the bounds originally established. Insist your voice be given equal access to the public square in unrestricted speech, free of prejudicial, ideologically motivated deplatforming. Your individual autonomy, as well as the collective influence of the morally upright, will be preserved in no other way.

Choose to love, -DA


Here, it is not yet a week since an addled young man shot up his former high school in Parkland, Florida. And people everywhere are afraid.

We have all felt fear, so there’s seldom a need to define dread. It’s burn graduates through degrees of apprehension to stark terror in every life, because we are fragile and fleeting creatures bounded in an uncertain existence by a beginning and an end, with our anticipated span between at best an assumption. Fear is natural once we witness hurt … or worse.

In our next release and Boone’s fifth novel, A Garden in Russia—currently editing—the wife of Russia’s FSB Director, my character Ana Lyubov, has this to say about the duty and responsibility for comporting oneself:

“Faith is given to overcome fear, girl, for those who live in righteousness. It is history’s lesson at every turn. This is our time to be strong … for your father’s sake.”

And again, to another:

“Let me tell you, Deborah Vosse … though my husband is in prison, and my daughter a captive, I feel no less the hand of God in these difficult days.”

And this from Boone:

“When fear keeps you from your promises, your duty, from accomplishing whatever it is you are tasked to do by your love for others … only then are you a coward.”

To fear is no dishonor. Fear can be motivating, as adrenaline is invigorating. What follows behind sometimes is problematic.

Fear exists as a tool for those whose main ambition is to direct the lives of others. Like  animal predators in nature rather than society, spiritually deficient personalities seek, sense, cultivate, and exploit it because they recognize the manipulative advantage of leveraging terror.

Terrorists use it as a means to an end. That the techniques of terror are more blatantly homicidal than a politician whose strategy is identical in its heartless essence marks only a matter of decrepit degree. The core value of both sociopathic subsets is dominance. In each case goal-oriented behavior exhibits to the exclusion of valued humanity.

In every case, fear depends on its acceptance in the targeted group embracing the emotion. Sometimes this occurs out of fatigue following relentless, propagandistic assault, but more often the cause is a perception of helplessness. Those manipulating the sensation of horror have some transition in mind, and often what presents as a solution is anything but.

Today the architects of fear are targeting the natural right of free people to possess the means of their defense. The framers of our Constitution recognized this before all but a few when delineating the rights its first ten amendments safeguard, because they were about setting down unchanging principles of governance unhindered by tyranny. In doing so, they were setting the boundaries of government free people would not need to fear.

Frank Herbert’s masterpiece Dune has his portrayed Bene Gesserit trainees recite their litany against fear as “the mind killer” and “the little death that brings total obliteration.” Herbert’s characters, so prepared, faced their emotion, let it go, and traced its path afterward to better understand themselves. So should we.

Fear stems from uncertainty, but certitude is a matter of education. It is infuriating that fear is being cultivated in our educational institutions these days. Its introduction is diminishing rather than edifying.

Malleability originates in a condition of essential incapability. Performance anxiety in vital aspects of life, such as assuring one’s personal safety, amplifies perceptions of dependency, whose end result is to make its subject weak rather then strong. Personal, emotional and physical strength should be the goal of worthwhile mentors. To do otherwise brings into question the motives and honor of those responsible for producing the next generation of citizens, and the ideological condition their curriculum is designed to produce.

I repeat: fear, in whatever condition one finds oneself, regardless needs to be embraced to have an influence. The strength to do otherwise is bestowed first in the spirit and then in the mind, where a decision to act must take place. This is why those whose sum displays in their ambition go to such lengths to assure its abundance in prospective subjects. Tyranny is never in the best interest of the oppressed, and tyrants know this better than anyone. It must be made to appear as the best choice, and to do so more noble aspects of the human experience must be put out of mind.

The fear of death, the scariest and most inevitable doorway we face in life, is the tool God’s enemy uses to turn us from His will. That the enemy and his plans are defeated already through the Resurrection of Christ is the treasure of faith and secret strength for those of us who believe, and freely available should it be sought. This realization is God’s goal, just as His enemy’s schemes intend to keep you from it.

So, here in the wake of another tragedy and in the midst of upset and proposed, agenda-based solutions on the political Left, I would encourage you. Find your faith and build your strength in the company of worthwhile teachers in whatever aspect of your personal development seems lacking. They are the ones whose goals are to make you strong, independent, reverent, and capable rather than a quailing thrall. They will teach you how to help yourself rather than carry or steer you into servitude. They will ask nothing but their due in exchange, if wishing anything at all but that you likewise pay forward the lessons accumulated from similarly happy, formative circumstances of their own in days gone by.

They are the ones you will remember on the day you’re able to say, “I’m not afraid, I am free.”

Choose to love, -DA


In production news, as mentioned, the fifth installment of Boone’s File is editing and anticipating a September release. As always, whether you have read in Jon’s Trilogy, or Sean’s File, or followed Boone’s progress, we depend on your recommendations and your reviews to get out the word.

“If you’ve read something, I hope you said something.” Your few words, describing to prospective readers how my novel made you feel, will never stop helping me … or go unappreciated here.

Arma Virumque Cano

The news out of London today, regarding the attack on Parliament, is tiresome. Not so only from the repetitive nature of predictable aggression from adherents of an ideology of conquest and subjugation, but amplified by acculturated false premises enabling tragedy among the civilized.

Long gone are the days of the Victorian era, when Dr. Watson or a man of his bent walked the streets of London with a prudent revolver in his pocket. Restrictions on the rights of free folk to go armed began at the turn of the twentieth century, with the permitting processes progressing through ever-increasing requirements to show necessity. The necessity of free people possessing arms at all was deemed nonexistent by 1920, after which point the Brits were effectively disarmed before the advent of hostilities in the 1940s.

The inherent right to defend one’s person and property remains, of course, and by extension so does possessing the means. Those are qualities inherent in the human condition, not granted by consensus or through the beneficence of government. Yet in Britain those rights are denied in the name of civility. In our time, even police officers, save for a few widely dispersed armed response teams, are denied tools to address in an effective manner realities encountered wherever free will exists. They are, after all, policing a civil country.

The world, sad to say, does not function on the basis of civility, but on enforcing order. Civility is a luxury guarded by the capable, in whose absence the overly civil become cowards and then slaves. Released from the bonds of service, government out of bounds becomes a master when no one remains capable of returning it to its line.

The U.K. should learn from today. But then again, they should have learned already from readily available studies of days behind and ages past. Regardless of valued civility, subsequent lessons might be louder and closer to home until consequences deliver their common message: gentility does nothing to stop armed aggression. Strength does that.

Civility, though a worthy goal, does nothing to curtail the compulsions of the predatory and tyrannical to direct the lives of others. To those, civility marks nothing more than a target for domination, because such seems a reasonable outcome of aggression. Evil discounts the admonitions of humanity with mocking laughter, neither appreciating the beauty and fragility of life nor wishing and hoping for its abundance. Where gentle people see reflections of themselves, evil sees a food chain, and that is a condition imagined universal amenity will never change. Just as love is a choice, so are works of death instead.

Writing of such things as I do, out of convenience I termed the resulting philosophy The Amidei Doctrine, which states that whoever sets aside humanity loses the consideration of civilized folk. There’s nothing new in this, as it merely recognizes the way things have always been. Truth is like that, as whatever solid premise exists has always been and ever will be so.

Unwanted fire must be extinguished, unless one is willing to watch its depredation eventually run out of fuel. Likewise, violence needs to be met with countervailing force to bring about an early end to it, ideally before any of the goals of evil are met. One need not be brutish, or relish the process, or strut in the aftermath. One need not lay down civility in being capable. One does, however, require the means to work whatever noble purpose is set in place by destiny. Lacking such, one’s end may be ignoble rather than inspiring, and victimhood anywhere does nothing to improve the general state of affairs.

It was, unfortunately, the case in London today, and in 2015 Paris, where another unarmed police officer was executed in submission on a sidewalk outside the offices of Charlie Hebdo. Similar tragedies have occurred in many other places where people “didn’t feel right” about keeping weapons close at hand. Obliviousness, cowardice, and abrogation of responsibility have an effect wherever they are allowed, and always to the detriment of those subject to abrupt disillusion. Reality can be a harsh schoolmaster, and some of its worst lessons are appreciated only at a distance by observers after the dust settles. We can and should do better. Nothing is so uncivil as unhindered homicide.

Choose to love. Choose strength as well. -DA


In production news, my ninth novel and Boone’s fourth, Meat for the Lion, has passed the halfway point in primary editing. As predicted, tax season is hampering progress. Yet, the good Doctor and company—Terry Bradley, Sean Ritter, General Peter McAllen, and the returning Deborah Vosse—should be back in time for summer beach reading, in June or shortly after.