Posts Tagged ‘gun control’

by baldilocks

If I didn’t know better, I’d say that a goodly portion of the 2020 Democratic Party candidates for president are working for Donald Trump.

At the Democratic-primary debate in Houston [on Thursday], Beto O’Rourke formally killed off one of the gun-control movement’s favorite taunts: The famous “Nobody is coming for your guns, wingnut.” Asked bluntly whether he was proposing confiscation, O’Rourke abandoned the disingenuous euphemisms that have hitherto marked his descent into extremism, and confirmed as plainly as can be that he was. “Hell yes,” he said, “we’re going to take your AR-15.”

O’Rourke’s plan has been endorsed in full by Cory Booker and Kamala Harris, and is now insinuating its way into the manifestos of gun-control groups nationwide. Presumably, this was O’Rourke’s intention. But he — and his party — would do well to remember that there is a vast gap between the one-upmanship and playacting that is de rigueur during primary season, and the harsh reality on the ground. Prohibition has never been well received in America, and guns have proven no exception to that rule. In New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey, attempts at the confiscation of “high capacity” magazines and the registration of “assault weapons” have both fallen embarrassingly flat — to the point that the police have simply refused to aid enforcement or to prosecute the dissenters. Does Beto, who must know this, expect the result to be different in Texas, Wyoming, or Florida? (…)

Unwittingly or not, O’Rourke and his acolytes have stuck a dagger into the exquisitely calibrated gun-control messaging on which their party has worked for the better part of 20 years. No voter can now say he wasn’t warned.

Many of my Facebook friends are still anti-Trump – some of them are conservatives who are trouble by the president’s in-your-face demeanor. Others are slightly left of center liberals. But since O’Rourke came out of the confiscation closet, some of them are talking about sitting out the 2020 election or doing what many of us did in 2016: holding their noses and voting for Donald Trump

My friends understand that it’s all fun and games until the government starts seriously talking about mandatory “buybacks.”

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

by baldilocks

Dennis Prager:

Our age loves scientific equations. Here’s one you weren’t taught at college but which affects you as much as the law of gravity:

GI – W = E

Good Intentions (GI) minus Wisdom (W) leads to Evil (E)

Prager uses an example that’s obvious — at least to the sane.

Communism, the greatest mass murder ideology in history, was for almost all its rank-and-file supporters rooted in their desire to do good. (This was rarely true for its leaders, whose greatest desire was power.)

The many millions of people all over the world who supported communism did not think they were supporting unprecedented levels of mass murder and torture or an equally unprecedented deprivation of the most fundamental human rights of a substantial percentage of humanity. They thought they were moral, building a beautiful future for humanity — eliminating inequality, enabling people to work as hard or as little as they wanted, providing their fellow citizens “free” education and “free” health care. They were convinced that the moral arc of history was bending in their direction and that they were good because their motives were good.

That’s why leftists have such moral contempt for those who differ with them. Because those on the left are so good, only bad human beings could possibly oppose them.  (…)

The problem with communists and with leftists who don’t consider themselves communists is not that none of them mean well. It’s that they lack wisdom.

As Thomas Sowell would put it, such people fail to ask this question: “And then what happens?” Should someone ask question, the wisdom-less doer of good will give a rainbow and unicorns answer, and that answer will be a revelation.

Take Robert “Beto” O’Rourke and his promise to institute mandatory “buyback” of AR-15s and other firearms should he become president.

“No. I don’t see the law enforcement going door to door. I see Americans complying with the law. I see us working with gun owners, non-gun owners, local, county, state, federal law enforcement to come up with the best possible solution. I have yet to meet an owner of an AR-15 who thinks it’s OK that we have these kind of mass killings in this country,” O’Rourke said when asked by the Washington Examiner about specifics of his plan.

When pressed further about how he plans to enforce his proposal for those who would not comply, he responded, “How do you — how do we enforce any law? There’s a significant reliance on people complying with the law. You know that a law is not created in a vacuum.”

Got that? He won’t use the enforcers to enforce such a law, but the law will be enforced.

Magically.

Beta Male is an easy target — if you’ll pardon the expression — but it’s clear that his “plan” is a perfect example of Prager’s equation. Does O’Rourke want to do good? I doubt it and think that he and other politicians who would forcibly disarm law-abiding Americans have tyranny as their ultimate goal.

O’Rourke knows that his proposal would lead to lots of dead bodies but he’s too big of  a coward to admit it, much less admit that the body bags would be a feature rather than a bug, from his point of view.

President O’Rourke presiding over a disarmed America would have enormous power.

It’s certain, however, there are some voters who do want to do good and who would vote for him or for one of the other Democrat candidates who are promising — as president — to confiscate private firearm property. Such voters want there to be no more mass shooters ever and believe that if the government just takes the tools away, mass shootings will simply stop happening.

Magically.

And it is here where the dearth of wisdom is most glaring among all good-faith advocates of gun confiscation: they think that government can fix humans. This notion has remained pervasive over centuries.

On the contrary, we human beings cannot change our flawed and sinful nature. Politicians can’t. Laws can’t. We can only be mindful of our individual natures and attempt to protect ourselves against those who abandon themselves to their sinful natures, mass shooters being among this number.

Those who are without wisdom believe that humankind is innately good — in spite of the evidence to the contrary that each one of us observes every day.

The perfect sinless, gun-less world that the doers of good say they want is promised by God, But He has conditions which a lot of them aren’t willing to meet. They’d rather let politicians like O’Rourke do the dirty work for them.

And that road will end in the same place it has all the other times.

O’Rourke has no chance of becoming president in 2020, but the front-running Democrats want to take the guns, too.

P minus G equals D. I’ll let you figure out what the variables indicate.

(Thanks to Bearing Arms)

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

 

by baldilocks

It’s fun to watch as several of the remaining Democrat candidates for the presidency try to outdo each other in their proposals for disarming the law-abiding.

Kamala Harris creates a problem, then promises to solve it.

Elizabeth Warren’s plans for presidential gun confiscation involve executive orders coupled with nagging the American public to death.

“We will make change, we’ll figure out what works, and then we’ll make some more change and some more change.”

Warren added, “I will take executive action in every corner, with the Department of Justice, with ATF, to move as much as I can.”

And Beta (spelling intentional) tries to top them both:

O’Rourke’s plan lists a number of reforms, including the buyback [sic] program that would remove all banned assault weapons from private ownership — a proposal that goes further than any presented so far by the Democratic field.

(…)

“Beto is calling for a mandatory buyback program for assault weapons and a voluntary buyback program for handguns. To create a funding stream for buybacks, Beto will increase the excise tax on gun manufacturers and fines imposed on gun traffickers, and will enable ATF to purchase any banned assault weapons presented to the agency. Individuals who fail to participate in the mandatory buyback of assault weapons will be fined.”

Beta, sweetheart, straight-out threatening to kick down our doors would be more honest and sound less weaselly.

Honestly, its a toss up as to which one of these I’d like to see lose to President Trump in 2020.

And you may think I forgot about the other Democratic Party front-runner, the former vice president, but I have not.

He would certainly lose to President Trump also, but it has been painfully obvious that Joe Biden is declining in cognitive capabilities. I don’t want to see that final melt down happen in public. Even Biden doesn’t deserve that.

But the others aren’t much smarter. A smart candidate who wanted to take all the guns wouldn’t be so open about it.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

Once upon a time nearly a decade ago in a New England State where Republicans never won national office and whose senior member of congress was considered the liberal Lion of the Senate even though he had run away and left a young lady to die (but nobody talked about that until years after his death because to do so might hurt Democrats) there was a state senator in a Republican district. He was a nice guy a soldier who had a beautiful wife and two lovely daughters. His seat was pretty secure and while he would have liked to have advanced further, the nature of the state made it unlikely he would ever be more than a state senator.

One day the Senator died and there was a special election to fill that seat and the Democrat managed to get into internal squabbles and nominated a candidate even worse than Hillary Clinton.  At the same time Democrats were trying to push through Obamacare and that Senate Seat turned out to be the 60th seat which would allow Democrats to break a filibuster and get any bill that the Democrats in the house and senate could agree on passed.

Well to everybody’s surprise thanks to the special election, the bad democrat nominee and the unpopularity of Obamacare the GOP candidate a state senator nobody had heard of by the name of Scott Brown won the special election and became a US Senator.

While he was a good US Senator and had time even for those who disagreed with him during his re-election campaign his consultant told him that the only way to win re-election, even though he was one of the most popular pols in the state was to run away from the activists who had showed up to vote for him. So he did so doing his best to compromise on issues dear to those tea party activists and when election day came he lost to a Harvard Senator who pretended to be an Indian.

After narrowly losing re-election and getting his pick for GOP chair rammed though the state convention he decided not to run in a 2nd special election made open by the new Senior Senator replacing Hillary Clinton in the Obama Cabinet even though his pick for state chair was picked specifically to help him win.

Instead he began considering running for Senate in New Hampshire.  He thought that his combination of being a “moderate” on social issues would be a good fit for election in the granite state but in addition to his positions on abortion that troubled many activists he took a soft line on Guns being open to gun control measures.

Gun rights activists in the state took notice and even before he announced his candidacy protested his appearances in the state and a blogger who covered the protester (who outnumbered those viewing the speech) in the freezing cold noted:

If you are drawing 300 people standing out in the cold on Dec 19th to protest Scott Brown how many are going to show up when the weather is warmer and they don’t have to stomp down the snow to make room for people to stand.

And that very year when a gun control measure came up for a vote in the state the overwhelmingly Democrat legislature voted against it and the blogger in question noted:

I’m confused:

Didn’t Democrats take the NH in an incredible landslide in 2012 winning over 110 seats from the majority republicans?

Didn’t everyone tell us the state was turning blue permanently and Senators like Kelly Ayotte were doomed unless they changed their tune on guns?

Didn’t Scott Brown himself come to NH and ignore a pro-gun rally of 300 people in the ice and snow emphasizing his support for gun restrictions.

I mean it’s one thing for Wendy Davis to flip on guns but Texas is about as far from NH as you can get, how do you get a totally lopsided victory for the pro 2A forces drawing over 60 democrats to their cause in a state in NE that we are told is turning blue.

The explanation will sound familiar to anyone who read the blog yesterday and saw the votes switch at the last minute.

A source in the state tells me NH Democrats wanted to pass this bill but with an election year that is looking poor they needed members of the house willing to bite the bullet & risk their seats.

And later on when covering Brown at the NLRC event notedNLRC event noted:

Nominating Brown takes the gun issue off the table that the GOP should be able to beat the Democrats over the head with and will put Kelly Ayotte who voted on the right side of the bill on the spot two years before her re-election campaign.

Well the NH party apparatus didn’t listen to those voter and that advice and nominated Scott Brown as their candidate in the US Senate and in a year where GOP senators won all across the country Scott Brown was the exception losing his election and ironically giving the Democrats the extra vote they needed to save Obamacare and Planned Parenthood funding during the early days of the Trump presidency and the former state senator from Massachusetts never held public office again.

Why am I telling the GOP this tale, because of this headline at Drudge:

REPUBLICANS COALESCE AROUND GUN CONTROL

Which links to a NYT story saying that the GOP is considering supporting new gun control laws:

Gun violence has been one of the most divisive and intractable issues in Washington, and even gun control advocates conceded that getting the House bill through the Senate would be a heavy lift. Senator Patrick J. Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania, said Monday that he was reviving his background checks bill, which fell to a filibuster in 2013, and that he intended to press Mr. McConnell to bring it up if Republicans were convinced they had the votes.

“I think we need Manchin-Toomey,” Mr. Toomey said, referring to Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, his co-sponsor. “I think it’s overdue. This is a common-sense, very broadly supported measure that would fully respect the rights of law-abiding citizens, fully respect the Second Amendment.”

This has been the siren song of Democrats anxious to disarm their political foes for 40 years and every time the GOP members fall for this nonsense pushed by the left and the MSM it costs them elections, which is exactly why the left is so anxious for the GOP to go along with it.

I urge the GOP not to fall for this nonsense and leave them with this tweet…:

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

and this warning. If you manage to win a primary when you run on gun control don’t expect 2nd amendment voters to turn up for you in the general election.