Tag Archives: Gun rights

The Washington Post’s Double Standard on Immigration and Guns, by Ryan McMaken

What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to do unsupportable, self-contradictory intellectual backflips. From Ryan McMaken at mises.org:

Last week, the Washington Post‘s editorial board came out against sanctuary cities. No, not the kind of sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce federal immigration law. The Post‘s editors have no problem with that. Instead, the Post came out against the efforts by some local governments to oppose state- and federal-level enforcement of restrictions on gun ownership.

The Post didn’t go easy on these efforts either. The editorial likened the gun-owner sanctuary efforts to “vigilantism” and “frontier justice,” with the obvious implication being these people are one step away from organizing lynch mobs. Moreover, we’re told the movement is “nonsense fanned by mischief-makers with an agenda,” and will lead to “chaos.”

Recognizing the obvious double standard the Post is proposing for immigrant sanctuaries and gun-owner sanctuaries, the authors try to explain it all away:

The distinction between the two sanctuaries is basic. Localities that have passed resolutions declaring themselves Second Amendment sanctuary jurisdictions are threatening to ignore laws enacted by duly elected state legislatures and signed by governors. Immigration-focused sanctuary localities are breaking no law; rather, they are refusing purely voluntary cooperation in service to federal law enforcement.

Continue reading

Bipartisan Attacks on the Second Amendment, by Ron Paul

Don’t expect the Republicans to show any spine when it comes to protecting Second Amendment rights. From Ron Paul at ronpaulinstitute.org:

The House of Representatives recently passed legislation that would expand the national background check system to require almost everyone selling firearms, including private collectors who supplement their incomes by selling firearms at gun shows, to perform background checks on the potential buyers. The bill has a section purporting to bar creation of a national firearms registry. However, the expanded background check system will require the government to compile lists of those buying and selling guns. In other words, it creates a de facto national gun registry.

Similar to the experience with other types of prohibition, making it more difficult to legally buy a gun will enhance the firearms black market. Criminals, terrorist, and even deranged mass shooters will thus have no problem obtaining firearms.

It is no coincidence that the majority of mass shootings take place in “gun-free zones,” where shooters know their targets will be unarmed. This shows that any law making it more difficult for Americans to own and carry firearms makes us less safe. If Congress really wanted to reduce the incidence of gun violence, it would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act. This law leaves children easy prey for mass shooters by mandating that public schools be “gun-free zones.”

Continue reading

Doug Casey on Arming Teachers

Doug Casey speaks out on gun rights, and advocates “every self-respecting person should be well-armed.” From Casey at caseyresearch.com:

Justin’s note: On February 14, 17 people lost their lives in a shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

Sadly, tragedies like this routinely happen in the United States. Every time they do, Americans demand radical reforms. And for once, the government’s delivering.

President Trump has already said that he wants to ban the sale of bump stocks. And he thinks teachers and coaches should carry firearms in schools.

That’s a controversial suggestion. Some people think Trump’s a lunatic for saying this. Other people think it’s a brilliant idea.

But I couldn’t help but wonder what Doug Casey thinks. So, I called and asked him myself…


Justin: Doug, what do you think of Trump’s latest suggestion?

Doug: It’s an OK temporary solution. First of all, everybody has a right to be armed. Historically, a major difference between a slave and a free man was that a free man could be armed. The slave couldn’t. The right to be armed is primarily a moral issue, not a legal issue. It’s a matter of principle. Which means it’s not open to compromise.

But there’s also a practical aspect to this. If you can’t arm yourself, you’re at the mercy of anyone who is. I believe the people who want to confiscate—i.e., steal—or restrict weapons are actually both dangerous and stupid. Why stupid? Let’s define the word. Being stupid doesn’t necessarily mean having a low IQ. Anti-gun nuts sometimes have high IQs—but IQ is surprisingly irrelevant in daily life.

A better definition of stupidity is “an inability to see only the immediate and direct consequences of actions, not the indirect and delayed consequences.” Among those, being unarmed is putting oneself at the mercy of a stronger miscreant. An even better definition of stupidity is “an unwitting tendency towards self-destruction.” If an anti-gun nut suffers a home invasion, perhaps then he’ll realize how stupid it is.

To continue reading: Doug Casey on Arming Teachers

With Bloomberg And Democrats At Bay, Now Is The Best Time To Flex Your 2A Rights, by Duane Norman

It’s a great time to stock up on firearms and ammo. From Duane Norman at fmshooter.com:

President Trump‘s election has done little to mollify the appetite of gun control advocates.  In spite of the losses incurred by politicians who have supported gun control over the years, recent mass shootings in Las Vegas and Texas have emboldened gun grabbers to continue their quest to restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

Former Vice President Joe Biden was brazen enough to appear on NBC’s Today Show and state that the man who stopped the Texas massacre never should have been legally permitted to own the weapon:

The only thing that was surprising about Biden’s commentary is that it didn’t occur sooner; as Free Market Shooter has recently covered, the gun control playbook has been to call for gun control in the wake of any mass shooting, long before the facts have been determined:

Leading the charge was former President Obama… joining in his chorus were New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, NBA basketball coach Steve Kerr, and a slew of Congressional Democrats, none of whom bothered to wait until more facts on the incident were available.

But wait a second… wasn’t Trump’s win supposed to be good for gun rights?  

Indeed, gun rights advocates hoped to advance legislation to both remove suppressors from NFA regulation, and implement national concealed carry (CCW) reciprocityAnd in spite of the fact that gun control groups have all but lost the fight against suppressors, House Speaker Paul Ryan refuses to bring either bill to the House floor for a vote:

It is October 31 and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) is ignoring national reciprocity legislation for the 43rd consecutive week.

National reciprocity was introduced by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC) on January 3, 2017, and law-abiding citizens have been waiting for Congress to take up the measure ever since.

The wait is fast-approaching a year, yet Ryan remains mum on the legislation. President Trump signaled that he wanted national reciprocity early in his campaign.

And even though Ryan is facing down a Republican challenger within his own district that wants to advance CCW reciprocity

 

To continue reading: With Bloomberg And Democrats At Bay, Now Is The Best Time To Flex Your 2A Rights

Why the gun is civilization. By Mark Kloos

Guns are protection against those who would deal with us by force. That’s why governments don’t like them. From Mark Kloos at munchkinwrangler.wordpress.com:

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

To continue reading: Why the gun is civilization.

 

Be Careful With Those Secret Watchlists, Congressman, by Lucy Steigerwald

The government can put you on a no-fly list as a potential terrorist and it’s up to you to prove you don’t belong there. Now the gun controllers want to deny you the right to buy guns if you’re on the list, regardless of how you got there. From Lucy Steigerwald at antiwar.com:

The horrifying June 12 massacre at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando is just the sort of tragedy that demands government action. The death toll – whether it was the worst mass shooting in US history depends entirely on your definition of the former – was 49 people; around 50 were injured.

Government rode into action after Omar Mateen’s savagery. The people, such as they are, followed with demands that we do something, and do it quickly. No matter the tragedy – real or bizarre moral panic – elected officials and their constituents demand a fix. Unfortunately, quick government fixes for serious problems tend to look like alcohol and drug prohibition, the dangerously flexible Afghanistan invasion’s Authorization for Use of Military Force, or the PATRIOT Act.

And on Wednesday, some 40 House Democrats decided to sit on the floor and protest the lack of a vote on gun control legislation that they support. Parts of this legislation is a disturbingly bipartisan support for a denial of Second Amendment rights if someone is on a watchlist.

Regardless of your stance on the broader issue of gun control (I’m against it), the dismantling of gun rights without due process via a would-be buyer’s status on the no-fly list, or other terrorism watchlists should be something of concern to all Americans. It is in fact so concerning that the good people at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) don’t support this legislation. It has also been critiqued by the left-leaning folks at outlets as diverse as The Intercept and Gawker.

The day of representative civil disobedience was brought to you by Congressman John Lewis, who was once placed on the no-fly list himself. It took him a good while to get off of it, thereby proving that it takes a concerted effort for even the most privileged among us to affirm their innocence. (Lewis was joined by the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, so insert your no-drive list jokes here). It’s a bit harder for nobodies who go to the airport, and learn that they mysteriously can’t be allowed on an airplane, but don’t know why.

More frustratingly still, Lewis also was a bona fide Civil Rights era bad-ass, who marched with Martin Luther King Jr., and who was a Freedom Rider that was beaten for his trouble. (It doesn’t hurt to remind people that King himself had guns and armed guards for part of his career, and his application for a concealed carry permit was rejected.) Lewis, it seems, should be able to remember that once upon a time, gun control was a purposeful effort to disarm minorities, and now those minorities are more likely to be Muslims, but the principle of due process should still be upheld.

In short, a man who has done incredible things in his life lead a plush, catered government protest which advocated for denying rights of people because the government put them on a list. But as Sen. Dianne Feinstein put it, Americans must “prove they’re innocent” if this happens.

To continue reading: Be Careful With Those Secret Watchlists, Congressman