Would it make a difference if abortion doctors used guns?


Tragedy is a horrible thing, but with it comes political controversy. We see this after every tragic murder spree, whether it be with a gun or another device. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, transportation security stepped up and the surveillance state became greater. With the recent attacks at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, the gun control lobby has renewed it’s push to discipline law-abiding American citizens for the acts of terrorists.

But is it really about saving lives or simply getting rid of guns?

In a perfect world, we wouldn’t have weapons, because they wouldn’t be needed. There would be peace on Earth, no crime or murder, and Utopia would be here. But as we saw after the tragic rampage in Paris, France, getting rid of guns in an imperfect world doesn’t work. If the citizens are disarmed, the bad guys can get them from elsewhere.

The other problem is it’s not just guns.


September 11th was an attack that resulted from terrorists with box cutters hijacking airplanes. There wasn’t a gun involved. While the San Bernardino terrorists did have guns, they also had explosives. Explosives and airplanes do more damage than guns.

Maybe the whole push by gun control advocates isn’t about saving lives.

If the gun control lobby, the entire leftwing movement and Democratic Party were all worried about the loss of innocent lives, why do they protect abortion? Why would these people demean the lives of unborn children, who are defenseless against an abortion doctor and powerless to defend themselves?

What if abortion doctors used guns to abort unborn children?

Some simple mathematics would lead one to the logical conclusion here. The liberal outrage is significantly less if an airplane hits a building. Is there mourning? Quite a bit, but nobody is mocking the mourning of political opponents. Liberals aren’t ripping Republicans for not calling for banning airplanes. The same applies for box cutters used to hijack the airplanes, explosives used in California, or vests rigged with explosives in Paris.

Guns change the entire equation for tragedy.


If someone uses a gun to commit a tragedy, the left seizes on a political opportunity. Unless a Republican caves to their gun control agenda immediately, there is a great deal of disrespect and mocking going on. Democratic legislators act like children poking fun at those expressing heartbreak and then sit in the middle of the House of Representatives chamber floor acting like brats.

Did Democrats mock the mourning of opponents when box cutters were used to hijack airplanes, and Republicans didn’t call for an end to box cutters or airplanes? Did Democrats mock the mourning of opponents when explosives were used in California? Vests misused in France?

There’s only silence.

It then begs the question: would Democrats care more about aborted children if abortion doctors used guns?

Abortion doctors have a brutal and an inhumane way of ending the life of an unborn child. Democrats not only lack the outrage, but they encourage the procedure and fight to ensure the federal government continues being an accomplice to it. Guns are also not involved, either.

If an abortion doctor used a gun to execute an unborn child, would everything be different for the Democratic Party?

Chris Dixon is a liberty activist and writer from Maine. In addition to being Managing Editor for the Liberty Conservative, he also writes the Bangor Daily News blog "Undercover Porcupine" and for sports website Cleatgeeks.

Latest from Philosophy

Thanks for visiting our site! Stay in touch with us by subscribing to our newsletter. You will receive all of our latest updates, articles, endorsements, interviews, and videos direct to your inbox.