Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Avoid Arguing Policy On Gun Control
Shout Bits Blog ^ | 1/7/13 | Shout Bits

Posted on 01/07/2013 7:16:02 AM PST by Shout Bits

If the Connecticut school massacre was the start of a contest to see who could be the crassest and most exploitive on the gun issue, the Left won in a landslide. Before the victims' bodies were even taken away by the coroner, the Left was blaming the NRA for the horror. No matter what the circumstances, the Left politicizes gun violence. Rep. Gifford's shooting was blamed on Gov. Palin and the Tea Party's indelicate political speech, despite murderer's being apolitical and deranged. Now that the Left has won the national political battle, they are using the latest tragedy toward their perennial lust for gun bans. Freedom loving people should avoid wading into the Left's meritless arguments and rather stand for their rights based on principle.

The Left, as typified by Sen. Feinstein, makes varied policy arguments against guns, many patently incorrect. The AR-15 does not fire high caliber rounds, it is not an automatic weapon, but yes, it can be used for hunting just fine. A 30 round magazine does not convey a magical advantage over a 10 round magazine, as it takes about a second to switch magazines and chamber the next round. Saying an 'assault rifle' is more dangerous than a similar rifle without a pistol grip is like saying racing stripes on a car make it faster. The list goes on, but the Left feeds on fear and ignorance, not reason. That is why arguing policy with the Left is futile.

Gun bans do not make anyone safer, as anyone living in Chicago should know. Still, while the Left sometimes claims to support the right to self-defense, Democrats always return to their gun confiscation instincts when the political wind is at their backs. Gun bans are usually political losers, so why should the Left bother? Leftist elitists in the Old Media and academia are indoctrinated in the belief that the US is evil. Professors like Louis Seidman think the US Constitution is outdated and optional. Anything that makes the US unique, such as its prosperity or its individual rights, is suspect to the Left. The OM and academic elites look elsewhere for their guidance, and very few countries respect the right to keep and bear arms. Since the US should conform to the ways of Socialist Europe, the US naturally should have a comprehensive gun ban as in Chicago. To the Left, gun bans are more about disdain for US exceptionalism than hatred of guns themselves. The Left just does not like the idea of power's resting with common people.

The less radical Left concede that some guns are OK, for the purpose of hunting. They call hunting a "legitimate" use for a gun. That is the reason arguing policy is a loser for gun rights because when the Left defines what is legitimate, the noose around gun rights becomes ever tighter. Self-protection is a right, not a social policy. Just as the government may not demand a reason why a suspect remains silent under questioning or refuses to be searched, the government may not question for what purpose a responsible adult choses to own guns. Basic natural rights like speech, free association, and self-defense have always existed, and always will. David Gregory does not need a reason why he possessed a 30 round magazine. The real criminals are those who would deny him the right to own one. Even if a 30 round magazine or a pistol grip rifle is actually of little value, banning them is only a waypoint on the road to total gun bans. That is why those who respect the natural right to self-defense must stand on the firmer ground of principles and rights.

If freedom lovers must argue the practical need for guns, here is one: the US is going to collapse. Hopefully the collapse is far off, but every nation fails and falls into a violent contest for power. Even if the US solves its debt and spending problems, someday a thug will rise to power and seek to enslave Americans. When that day comes, maybe a century from now, who can be trusted with defending freedom? A military in the pocket of this future Caesar or ordinary citizens defending their rights. The US, the greatest nation ever, was founded and secured by the latter group. Better still, a future Caesar might think twice knowing ordinary citizens are heavily armed. For obvious reasons, the Nazis disarmed the populace before rounding up the Jews.

So, don't apologize for guns. Don't volunteer to put further limits on the natural right to self-defense in the spirit of compromise. The Left will never be satisfied until the entire US is subjugated as in Chicago or Washington. Basic human rights are universal, but they are often denied by evil governments. That is why rights must be defended, even when their exercise may be unpopular. Pres. Obama mocked natural rights when he derided his enemies for clinging to "guns or religion." Stand up. Buy a weapon and own it responsibly.

Shout Bits can be found on Facebook:

TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: alinskytactics; banglist; democrats; gunbans; guncontrol; guns; nocompromise; regulation; rights; secondamendment; tyranny; wewillnotcomply; youwillnotdisarmus

1 posted on 01/07/2013 7:16:14 AM PST by Shout Bits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Sipsey Street’s Mike Vanderboegh made the best argument to a well-known gun-grabber when Vanderboegh simply said: “If you try to take my guns, I will kill you.”

The point is made. The argument is over.

2 posted on 01/07/2013 7:40:55 PM PST by Oldpuppymax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson