Trampling 2nd Amendment Not Enough for Gun Ban Zealots

[priell3]

Although the Second Amendment is obviously the part of the Constitution the anti-gun "progressives" most love to hate, it's certainly not the only part they will destroy if we allow it. More and more, they have set their sights on the First Amendment as well, because gun rights advocates' free speech is interfering with their forcible citizen disarmament agenda.

Writing for the Long Island Press last week, Jaime Franchi went so far as to advocate "redefin[ing] the NRA as a terrorist/lobby organization." She begins:

Remember when Kentucky Fried Chicken became simply KFC? By changing the name of their restaurant, they changed the unhealthy perception that every delicious bite was not-so-slowly killing you. They took "fried" right out of the title, kept the Colonel"s famous recipe, and reaped healthy profits.

Brilliant.

The NRA has employed similar tactics.

Exactly, because the NRA was once called . . . oh, wait--they've always been the National Rifle Association, throughout their entire 150-year history. Well, you get the idea. If they ever had been called the "National Fried Rifle Association," they would certainly have changed the name by now.

http://jpfo.org/articles-assd04/tram...not-enough.htm

[GunLawyer001]

The "Brady Campaign" has gone through more name changes than African-Americans have.

Back when African-Americans were still "black", the Brady Campaign was "Handgun Control, Inc." And the NRA was still the NRA.

The only confusing part about the NRA is that they also promote responsible handgun use, in addition to rifle marksmanship. The NRA was founded after the Civil War as a response to poor rifle marksmanship among the industrialized northerners.

The various gun-banning groups are the folks who use code words and euphemisms. As is usual with their ilk, they project their worst traits onto others.

There's just no way to support an allegation that the NRA is hiding their goals, or re-branding themselves.

From Wikipedia, here's a list of major anti-gun groups:

American Hunters and Shooters Association
Americans for Responsible Solutions
Brady Campaign
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
Faiths United to Prevent Gun Violence
Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence
Mayors Against Illegal Guns
Moms Demand Action
National Gun Victims Action Council
Physicians for Social Responsibility
Stop Handgun Violence
Violence Policy Center

Notice that not one of them telegraphs their true goal of banning entire categories of guns, infringing the civil rights of law-abiding citizens, and barring guns from more places.

I've never seen any of them address the people causing the daily carnage in Chicago or Philadelphia among teen drug dealers. So apparently, "violence" is not their focus. It's just the guns. That's why you see them buying "back" guns from soccer moms and retirees, but never venturing unarmed into the bad parts of town where the vast majority of those gun deaths take place.

This is like Hillary complaining about Republican corruption. Or Michael Moore talking about "fatcats".

[GunLawyer001]

From the loony's article:

If we are to redefine “school shootings,” I think definitions are fair game. Let’s call things what they are. Let’s lay it all out on the table.

Here are two definitions:

1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest.

These two definitions come from different places, yet both have similar aims. The second one, however, does not count among it terrifying the population in order to achieve their political means. And that’s what the NRA does. By instilling fear in the public that more and more weaponry is needed to protect ourselves from outside threats, they do more than inflate their bottom line: they redefine how our lives are led. They change the culture.

Again, this is a psychotic form of projection, a totally self-blind kind of argument where the writer is obsessively unaware of her own failings. By HER OWN DEFINITION, she is a terrorist, inciting fear among the people in order to achieve her legislative goals.

The gun control lobby relies entirely on making the public afraid of guns. Their default argument is "just imagine what could happen!!"

Without the argument that "guns are a terrible threat to society, and unless we tighten up the 'loopholes' you will lose your children to gun violence", the anti-gunners wouldn't have any argument at all.

She whines that the media found the lies in the "school shootings" claim, and thinks that focusing on facts is being too picky. Well she should, because the facts pull the rug out from her entire argument.

The "school shootings" scam was a lie used to make the argument that "we must pass new laws NOW before your children are killed in these very frequent school shootings." Turns out, your kids are at very little risk, if they practice basic safety such as avoiding being drug dealers or hardcore gang members. If your son is a Crip selling meth next to the school, odds are you have a problem, with or without guns.

She also tries to discredit the meme "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." It takes more than repeatedly saying "that was discredited" (as they do with John Lott) to actually refute something. And in fact, most spree shootings (including mass school shootings) only ended when the first good guy showed up with a gun. And most events that would have become spree shootings ended when a good guy with a gun arrived.

Progressives simply embarrass themselves when they try to make a logical argument. If they could think logically, if they had a grasp of the facts, if they understood basic cause & effect and the Rule of Unintended Consequences, then they wouldn't be Progressives.

[TaePo]

And let us not forget that the anti-gun movement has its roots in the post-Civil War era. As black rights as individuals and free men began to be recognized, the southern groups lobbied to diminish or disparage those rights as much as possible. Of course, the denial of firearm rights was the most effective and quickest means to attack or deny their other rights.

So it would be fair to compare, IMHO, the anti-gun people as anti-rights groups as there is no way for one to maintain their rights against the government or other groups that would wish to take them away. Remember, only the individual has the power to waive their rights and that being temporary.

Further, we could say that the anti-gun groups are very similar or borne into the family such as the KKK and White Power movements post Civil War. Nice pedigree there.

And what is exceptionally ironic is the Democratic Party was originally the party that was anti-black but now seen as their savior.

[GunLawyer001]

And let us not forget that the anti-gun movement has its roots in the post-Civil War era. As black rights as individuals and free men began to be recognized, the southern groups lobbied to diminish or disparage those rights as much as possible. Of course, the denial of firearm rights was the most effective and quickest means to attack or deny their other rights.

So it would be fair to compare, IMHO, the anti-gun people as anti-rights groups as there is no way for one to maintain their rights against the government or other groups that would wish to take them away. Remember, only the individual has the power to waive their rights and that being temporary.

Further, we could say that the anti-gun groups are very similar or borne into the family such as the KKK and White Power movements post Civil War. Nice pedigree there.

And what is exceptionally ironic is the Democratic Party was originally the party that was anti-black but now seen as their savior.

If you think about one of their favorite memes, the black sharecropper family in their isolated hut, surrounded at midnight by 20 or 30 KKK members about to throw torches on the hut and burn them out....you have to wonder who would be in favor of disarming the black guy on his porch? Not the Republicans, that's for sure. The GOP was formed specifically to end slavery, and the GOP rammed through most of the civil rights legislation.

Seems to always be Democrats who find ways to better the odds for the KKK against the lone black head of household, by requiring licensing, requiring approval of the license by the good old boy sheriff, making guns unaffordable by mandating special taxes and gimmicks and allowing expensive lawsuits against gun makers and sellers, and increasing the categories of people who are denied the right to own guns (where's the study showing the much higher percentage of black men who are denied their gun rights because of drug convictions?)

[elweasel]

Seems to always be Democrats who find ways to better the odds for the KKK against the lone black head of household, by requiring licensing, requiring approval of the license by the good old boy sheriff, making guns unaffordable by mandating special taxes and gimmicks and allowing expensive lawsuits against gun makers and sellers, and increasing the categories of people who are denied the right to own guns (where's the study showing the much higher percentage of black men who are denied their gun rights because of drug convictions?)

Isn't that the same tactics used against gunowners today?

The GOP should end every press release with "And we are the party that ended slavery"

[TaePo]

Isn't that the same tactics used against gunowners today?

The GOP should end every press release with "And we are the party that ended slavery"

To which should be added:

"And we do not wish to see slavery instituted again in any form on any single person or group."

[elweasel]

To which should be added:

"And we do not wish to see slavery instituted again in any form on any single person or group."

And we do not wish to see slavery instituted again on any single person or group whether by law, taxes or, force.

Changed

in any form

to the red words. I think you need to spell it out for some people.

[TaePo]

We very well may be writing the next Amendment.


ETA= Was just thinking when this idea popped into my head. It is true both explicitly and implicitly:

The Government is like Fear. It only has Power over us, if we let it.

[1iarrowking]

Let's just get on with the inevitable civil war. The sooner it starts the sooner it ends and I don't want to miss it. After all, I am getting old. We ARE the ones with the guns. The smiley was an after thought or someone might think I'm serious.