On Feb. 2nd 2013, a former Navy Seal by the name of Chris Kyle was killed in Texas. Chris Kyle's claim to fame is that he has been referred to as "the most lethal sniper in American history" with 160 confirmed kills. He was nicknamed the "Devil of Ramadi" for his work in Iraq and even had a bounty of $80,000 put on his head. One thing that I want to point out and make very clear is that US Navy Seals are the real deal. They are among the most deadly people that have ever existed on this planet and Chris Kyle was at the tip of that spear.

A point-of-interest is that in 2008, Chris was in Sadr City, Iraq (which is a suburb of sorts of Baghdad) is where he made his longest successful shot. It killed an "insurgent" that was poised to attack a US Army convoy at a range of 2,100 yards. The reason why that is a point-of-interest, is that in 2007-2008 I was deployed to VBC (Victory Base Complex), Baghdad, Iraq. My unit's mission was to run convoy security throughout the Baghdad area, and we traveled to and through Sadr City. I bring this up not to pat myself on the back at all, but I want you to understand that I realize there is a possibility that Chris Kyle's longest shot, or maybe even some other unknown shot that he took saved my convoy from attack. Maybe this theoretical shot saved my life, this is an understanding that I have and you should remember while reading this article.

Dr. Ron Paul had tweeted during the media frenzy after Chris Kyle's death and said that "Chris Kyle's death seems to confirm that 'he who lives by the sword dies by the sword.' Treating PTSD at a firing range doesn't make sense." I decided to write this article after being in multiple online debates over this topic in the few days after the incident. So let's take some time and dissect what Dr. Paul said.

First of all, Dr. Paul is quoting the Christian Bible from the book of Matthew, chapter 26. It is a passage where men had come to arrest Jesus. One of Jesus' followers had taken his sword out and cut the ear of one of the men who came to arrest Jesus. Jesus then said, "Put your sword back in it's place because he who lives by the sword dies by the sword." What I believe Dr. Paul was saying by quoting this passage, was the same thing that he was trying to beat into everyone's head while he was running for President: that the problem is our Nation's long history of international interventionism.

What is interventionism you might ask? A quick definition is "sticking your nose in other people's business." Dr. Paul believes that the reason that people and nation's around the world hate the U.S. is not because we are free, but because we keep going all of the world trying to make other people and sovereign nations do what we want them to do (to which the consequences are referred to as ‘blowback’). Dr. Paul was also saying that it is because of our nation's interventionist policies that we have generations of young men and women like Chris Kyle and like Eddie Ray Routh that are dealing with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Some of these individuals who are completely debilitated by this disorder and millions of lives ruined because of these failed policies.

Dr. Paul goes on with his statement and says that "Treating PTSD at a firing range doesn't make sense." Nydailynews.com said in their article on this situation that "Kyle… brought Routh to the range at around 3:15 p.m. Saturday as a form of treatment to help him cope with a crippling case of PTSD."  

If the assumption is that what NYDailynews.com wrote is accurate, that Kyle took Routh to a shooting range to deal with a "crippling case" of PTSD, is that really the smartest thing to do? Routh has been in and out of jail, mental institutions and had made threats of violence against his family. Is it really the best idea to take someone who is dealing with COMBAT related stress that has destroyed his life to an area that could quite possibly make him relieve those stressful times or even give him "flashbacks?" Is it then really out of line for Dr. Paul to say that "Treating PTSD at a firing range doesn't make sense?" I do not think that is an unreasonable statement, in fact, I agree with it!

Like I said in the beginning, I have been in numerous debates dealing with this situation in the days after this tragic incident occurred. One of the things that was brought up to me was that "what Dr. Paul said was insensitive," and that could very well be true. One of my Facebook friends had made the comment to me that what Dr. Paul said was like him(my friend) going to my funeral and telling my mother in reference to her dead son (hypothetical example) “if you eat like a pig you'll die like a pig." What I am trying to get at here is that he has every right to do just that! Is it insensitive? Yes, but the First Amendment doesn't protect all but insensitive speech. It protects ALL SPEECH!!!

One of the problems that I see with our country is that we feel that we have the right to not be offended. That is false. The First Amendment grants me the right to say whatever I want, regardless of who is offended. If you don't like what I am saying then you have the right to walk away or block me. My right to free speech does not impede on your right to not hear me (but that does NOT mean that you have a right to trespass onto private property and say a single word..so the funeral example is really in bad taste as that private setting isn’t for: Facebook friends, ex-girlfriends, or random strangers).

The whole reasoning and meaning behind this article is to say that regardless of what you think of Chris Kyle he was one bad "mamba-jama" who was a pro at his skill (which is killing people). And regardless of what you think of Dr. Ron Paul, there was reason and solid logic behind what he said. This entire thing goes back to our natural rights, the rights that our founding father's  wrote about in our Constitution. If Ron Paul doesn't have the right to say what he said, if Pastors cannot speak about the sanctity of life at the pulpit, then we have no 1st Amendment, and a nation without the freedom of speech is a scary place.