Posted on 03/01/2012 3:49:25 AM PST by marktwain
Washington DC - -(Ammoland.com)- When news broke that Democrat legislators in Iowa had stormed out in protest over pro-Second Amendment bills which Republicans in the Republican-controlled legislature had brought up for a vote, I wasn’t too surprised.
After all, since when do Democrats approve of guns or support gun rights?
But as I read Iowa House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (D-Des Moines) try to justify avoiding a vote for two bills that would have given Iowans a state-constitutional right to keep and bear arms and broadened their grounds for using deadly force to protect life and property, the whole event seemed to go beyond simple Democrat-politics-as-usual and approach instead an example of an ongoing problem with Democrats in general—they hate our guns.
While some individual Democrats politicians and Democrat voters may cringe at that assertion (even Democrats in Iowa), it’s easily borne out by the facts.
Just think back to the 1990s, and even the example of southern Democrats like Bill Clinton prove my point. For it was he who implemented the Assault Weapons Ban in 1994, and he too called for gun control in 1999 in response to the Columbine school shootings. And once the Assault Weapons Ban ended in 2004, who was it that kept begging President Bush to re-institute it if not the Democrats in congress and the senate?
One of those Democrat was a previous Illinois state senator named Barack Obama.
As a state senator he supported a one-gun-a-month limit on gun purchases, supported laws making it illegal to use a gun for self-defense, and opposed laws that allowed law-abiding citizens to get permits to carry guns on their persons. As a U.S. senator, he supported bans on high-capacity magazines and he supported the Assault Weapons Ban. (For the record, when gun bans failed to be instituted Obama teamed up with fellow gun-grabber Senator Ted Kennedy, another Democrat, to try to ban certain types of ammo.)
Or think of what the Democrats have tried to do since coming back into power in 2008. As Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi went on ABC’s Good Morning America in April 2009 and talked of how the combination of Democrats having the White House and the Congress should enable them to reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban. Always careful, of course, to assuage our concerns that she wanted to take our guns, she added: “We don’t want to take…guns away. We want them registered.”
Why do Democrats talk about registering guns unless they want to take them? Historically speaking, Canada registered guns and now where are those guns? Hitler registered guns, and afterward, did the Jews (and others) have guns with which to protect themselves when the Nazi’s came? The answer every time is no. It’s an NRA maxim that should be axiomatic to all thinking people: “Gun registration leads to confiscation.”
Anyway, back to my point. After the Tucson shooting in which Congresswoman Gabby Giffords was injured in January 2011, Carolyn Comitta, the Democrat mayor of West Chester, PA, said the shooting was because there was a “lack of common sense gun laws.” (For those of you who don’t know it yet, when a Democrat says “common sense gun laws” they’re using leftist-jargon that means gun bans, more paper work for gun purchases, higher taxes on guns, registration of weapons, limits on magazine capacity, etc.) And on top of all this President Obama (a Democrat) is working “under the radar” to pass more gun control.
Now, going back again to Iowa House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and his gang of fellow Democrats stomping out of the building rather than voting on pro-gun measures, it seems fair to ask: What do Democrats have against guns (and gun rights)? Do they hate freedom or do they simply want more power over our lives?
AWR Hawkins
AWR Hawkins
About: AWR Hawkins writes for all the BIG sites, for Pajamas Media, for RedCounty.com, for Townhall.com and now AmmoLand Shooting Sports News.
His southern drawl is frequently heard discussing his take on current events on radio shows like America’s Morning News, the G. Gordon Liddy Show, the Ken Pittman Show, and the NRA’s Cam & Company, among others. He was a Visiting Fellow at the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal (summer 2010), and he holds a PhD in military history from Texas Tech University.
If you have questions or comments, email him at awr@awrhawkins.com. You can find him on facebook at www.facebook.com/awr.hawkins.
It is crazy to set up a huge expensive bureaucratic system, require everyone to jump though hoops and prove that they are *not* criminals in order to try, ineffectively, to prevent the few individuals who are not responsible, from having legal access to guns. This is a failed paradigm, and it should be abandoned. To accept the idea that the all gun sales should be monitored by the government, and only allowed to those it deems satisfactory is fundamentally wrong.
The entire idea of the enterprise has always been the death of a thousand cuts, where the restrictions on who can buy, and where, and how and what are continually increased until the number of gun owners is reduced to political insignificance.
GUN REGISTRATION IS GUN CONFISCATION (old but good)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2608785/posts
The Bolsheviks know the American Revolution (the “shooting war”) started when the British went to confiscate an arsenal; without guns there is no independence (subjects vs. citizens).
The Romans took away the weapons of the conquered, the American Indians had to give up their weapons and horses. Taking away weapons is what you do to subdue an unruly populace you wish to control.
Would someone put up that Bolshevik poster circa 1919 urging the masses to turn in all their weapons?
Democrats/Liberals don’t just hate guns, they hate those who own them and defend the right to own them. In other words, their political enemies. It’s class warfare against the gun-owning class.
Lexington & Concord were fought over gun confiscation. Patriots should always remember this.
Democrats despise freedom because the outcome is not equal.
In a free society, the exceptional will succeed, the mediocre will survive and the failures will fail.
They are strong union backers for the same reason...unions support the dead weight. Smart, dilligent workers do not depend upon unions to keep their jobs.
Most democrats are basically dead weight and failures at life.
The guns ensure the other rights won’t be violated; I personally believe a citizen should be able to own anything a police officer is allowed to wield (they do work for us after all, no?). If that includes too many genuine “assault rifles”, then take them away from the cops; you bet your arse they’d stop these weapons from making their way into the hands of criminals.
What do Democrats have against guns and gun rights?
It is precisely and exactly this: God made man, Samuel Colt made men equal.
Democrats do not want “all men to be equal.”
Democrats consider themselves the ultimate arbiters of society’s sociopolitical truths, and as much as they pay lip service to egalitarianism, true egalitarianism is poison to them.
The commissars among them consider themselves society’s elite, they reserve the right to tell the proles how to think and what to do, and woe betide any who leave the Democrat plantation.
The only way lefty losers can “win” is by taking away your freedom. Guns get in their way of subjugating you.
The Democrats seem to be doing a fine job of controlling things without disarming the populace, especially given that they control the media. They don't need to disarm us.
Although I understand the value of what you're saying here historically and philosophically, and there may yet be a time when it comes into play, I think the answer to the question is much simpler. The Democrats favor gun control because they know, yet will never admit, that their constituency is too irresponsible to not only exercise such a profound right, but to coexist in a society that has it, since they are responsible for the vast majority of violent crime in the United States. They are the ones killing and they are the ones being killed whether it's gang violence or an armed citizen protecting himself or property. Since the culture is protected and above criticism, we have to pay the price by giving up our rights a little at a time to appease these numbskulls who don't have the courage to address the problem, let alone admit that their is one. Best just to address it as a legal issue and kick the cultural can down the road to the next generation. The Democrats are good at being cowards. It's an integral part of who they are.
Not "either/or". More like "both/and".
Because they know what the Second Amendment means and they know THEY are the reason for it...and so do WE THE PEOPLE. Pure and simple.
It's hard to recruit goons to go after an armed man who has the legal right to use deadly force in self defense.
Also, criminals are another important Dem constituency. They don't like victims who can defend themselves.
Do they (Democrats) hate freedom or do they simply want more power over our lives?Dang. I hate trick questions.
“The only way lefty losers can “win” is by taking away your freedom. Guns get in their way of subjugating you.”
Ding ding ding, we have a winner.
With millions of gun owners, you have the largest militia in the world who will protect the freedoms given to us by the constitution.
Apparatchiks and the communist party is not going to take those freedoms away.
The only difference between Registration and Confiscation is the location of the firearms.
Let’s face facts – Registration means you need the government’s “Permission” to defend yourself.
“Permission” that can be withdrawn at any moment that is ‘convenient’ to the government.
Rights that can be negated at any time are no longer rights, but temporary authorizations.
The founder knew that rights that are meant to restrain the government cannot be provided by said government.
They will try to lull some into complicity in the first couple of steps with the promise that it will go no further.
Just as they did over in the UK, they will call for government controls over the acquiring of firearms and their registration – all the while promising that it won’t lead to confiscation.
They will try to push voluntary civilian disarmament as far as it will go, then lower the hammer and sickle when that meets resistance.
Important question folks: Is there any reason other than confiscation to have registration?
Look at it from the Commie’s point of view: Why would they go through all the effort of registering everyone’s guns, just to leave them where they are?
Communists are cowards and afraid of their victims shooting back.
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.