Why gun control of any degree must be opposed… even if you agree with it

Common Sense Gun Control
Readability

Why gun control of any degree must be opposed... even if you agree with it

There’s a sub­tle move being made by the left that is pulling many on the right to con­sider gun con­trol options. The use of the phrase “com­mon sense gun con­trol” has been mak­ing its way through main­stream media for a while, but lately we’ve been see­ing more con­ser­v­a­tives dis­cussing it. This was punc­tu­ated at the first Pres­i­den­tial debate when Don­ald Trump agreed with Hillary Clin­ton on the con­cept of “no fly, no buy” as a way to keep weapons out of the hands of sus­pected terrorists.

It makes sense, right? If they can just make the no-​fly lists more accu­rate and pre­vent law-​abiding patri­otic Amer­i­cans from find­ing their name on it, then what’s the harm in using them to pre­vent firearms from being pur­chased by the wrong peo­ple? That’s a good form of com­mon sense gun con­trol, right?

No. The basic con­cept of due process is shat­tered once any Amer­i­can is able to have their rights revoked with­out a dec­la­ra­tion from court fol­low­ing a proper pre­sen­ta­tion of evi­dence and the right­eous expo­sure of one’s accusers to the accused. Does this mean that the no-​fly lists are bad in con­cept? Once again, the answer is no. It is fool­ish to com­pletely ham­per law enforce­ment. There’s a fine line between pre­serv­ing indi­vid­ual free­doms and main­tain­ing a proper level of secu­rity. We’re not going to tackle that issue right now. What we will tackle is the dif­fer­ence between a no-​fly list and a no-​buy list. Travel in gen­eral and flight in par­tic­u­lar are priv­i­leges. Gun own­er­ship is a right. Revok­ing priv­i­leges for the sake of pru­dence is defen­si­ble when the sys­tem is designed to sup­port it. Revok­ing rights for the sake of pru­dence is unten­able. Our rights may not be revoked with­out due process, period.

What form of gun con­trol should we be will­ing to accept? None. It doesn’t mat­ter if you agree with it. I know that sounds con­trary to the Amer­i­can way, but we must be dili­gent in our oppo­si­tion of gun con­trol in any form. For exam­ple, I would pre­fer if those with men­tal ill­ness were not allowed to own a firearm, but that doesn’t mean we should have manda­tory psy­cho­log­i­cal eval­u­a­tions prior to pur­chase. I would pre­fer if only those with proper train­ing were allowed to carry a weapon, but I would never advo­cate for manda­tory firearms train­ing as a pre­req­ui­site to own­ing one. There are likely “com­mon sense gun mea­sures” that you would agree to in some form or fash­ion, but we must fight them out of prin­ci­ple even if we believe in them personally.

The rea­son is the crack­ing open of doors. When some­one is at the door and you believe they mean to do you harm, you don’t crack the door open for them. It becomes eas­ier for them to push it all the way open. Every form of gun con­trol, even com­mon sense mea­sures, will crack the door open for the left. They intend to do us harm in the form of full-​blown gun con­trol. We must keep the door firmly closed.

The old adage says, “if you give them an inch, they’ll take a mile.” That’s exactly what the left wants to do. They are cur­rently con­di­tion­ing Amer­i­cans, even con­ser­v­a­tives, into believ­ing that com­mon sense gun mea­sures are the way to go to keep us safe. What they won’t tell you is that the long-​term plan (though it really won’t take that long if we crack the door open for them) is to dis­man­tle our gun rights piece by piece. All it will take is a lib­eral Pres­i­dent and a lib­eral Con­gress to start push­ing their bound­aries. They will take them fur­ther and fur­ther until they get their wish.

Some believe they are try­ing to take away the 2nd Amend­ment. That’s ludi­crous. They wouldn’t dare try to take it away. In fact, they will embrace it. How­ever, embrac­ing it will be done in a way that’s intended to rede­fine it. We’re already see­ing arti­cles com­ing out every day talk­ing about mili­tia and mus­kets. The left truly believes their sen­si­bil­i­ties are higher than those of the found­ing fathers, so they’re going to use the hal­lowed words of the Con­sti­tu­tion and the Bill of Rights against us.

The real solu­tion is Con­sti­tu­tional carry, but that is as unre­al­is­tic today on a fed­eral level as tak­ing down the 2nd Amend­ment. Until the day comes when we can pro­tect our­selves and demon­strate how Chicago is a bro­ken model, we must not give an inch. We must not crack the door open at all. We must oppose fed­eral gun restric­tions, even if they make com­mon sense.

There’s a subtle move being made by the left that is pulling many on the right to consider gun control options. The use of the phrase “common sense gun control” has been making its way through mainstream media for a while, but lately we’ve been seeing more conservatives discussing it. This was punctuated at the first Presidential debate when Donald Trump agreed with Hillary Clinton on the concept of “no fly, no buy” as a way to keep weapons out of the hands of suspected terrorists.

It makes sense, right? If they can just make the no-fly lists more accurate and prevent law-abiding patriotic Americans from finding their name on it, then what’s the harm in using them to prevent firearms from being purchased by the wrong people? That’s a good form of common sense gun control, right?

No. The basic concept of due process is shattered once any American is able to have their rights revoked without a declaration from court following a proper presentation of evidence and the righteous exposure of one’s accusers to the accused. Does this mean that the no-fly lists are bad in concept? Once again, the answer is no. It is foolish to completely hamper law enforcement. There’s a fine line between preserving individual freedoms and maintaining a proper level of security. We’re not going to tackle that issue right now. What we will tackle is the difference between a no-fly list and a no-buy list. Travel in general and flight in particular are privileges. Gun ownership is a right. Revoking privileges for the sake of prudence is defensible when the system is designed to support it. Revoking rights for the sake of prudence is untenable. Our rights may not be revoked without due process, period.

What form of gun control should we be willing to accept? None. It doesn’t matter if you agree with it. I know that sounds contrary to the American way, but we must be diligent in our opposition of gun control in any form. For example, I would prefer if those with mental illness were not allowed to own a firearm, but that doesn’t mean we should have mandatory psychological evaluations prior to purchase. I would prefer if only those with proper training were allowed to carry a weapon, but I would never advocate for mandatory firearms training as a prerequisite to owning one. There are likely “common sense gun measures” that you would agree to in some form or fashion, but we must fight them out of principle even if we believe in them personally.

The reason is the cracking open of doors. When someone is at the door and you believe they mean to do you harm, you don’t crack the door open for them. It becomes easier for them to push it all the way open. Every form of gun control, even common sense measures, will crack the door open for the left. They intend to do us harm in the form of full-blown gun control. We must keep the door firmly closed.

The old adage says, “if you give them an inch, they’ll take a mile.” That’s exactly what the left wants to do. They are currently conditioning Americans, even conservatives, into believing that common sense gun measures are the way to go to keep us safe. What they won’t tell you is that the long-term plan (though it really won’t take that long if we crack the door open for them) is to dismantle our gun rights piece by piece. All it will take is a liberal President and a liberal Congress to start pushing their boundaries. They will take them further and further until they get their wish.

Some believe they are trying to take away the 2nd Amendment. That’s ludicrous. They wouldn’t dare try to take it away. In fact, they will embrace it. However, embracing it will be done in a way that’s intended to redefine it. We’re already seeing articles coming out every day talking about militia and muskets. The left truly believes their sensibilities are higher than those of the founding fathers, so they’re going to use the hallowed words of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights against us.

The real solution is Constitutional carry, but that is as unrealistic today on a federal level as taking down the 2nd Amendment. Until the day comes when we can protect ourselves and demonstrate how Chicago is a broken model, we must not give an inch. We must not crack the door open at all. We must oppose federal gun restrictions, even if they make common sense.