Misdirected debate insidiously erodes the Second Amendment

Misdirected debate insidiously erodes the Second Amendment
Credit: Shutterstock

In liberal-controlled areas, governments (we actually have a lot of them in the U.S.) have enacted very strict gun control measures. The process of purchasing any firearm is profoundly burdensome; trying to obtain a permit for a handgun often takes months. In some cities, you’re not getting a pistol, let alone a concealed carry permit, unless you’re a lawyer, a judge, or a police officer. Liberal elitism at its best.

Despite such measures, these places have the highest instances of gun-related crime in the nation.

On the one hand, we have people saying that the nine South Carolina parishioners would still be alive if Storm Drain hadn’t had access to a firearm. On the other, those who say that Carol Browne [of New Jersey] would still be alive if she’d received her pistol permit in a more timely manner. One can hardly disagree with either statement.

The problem is that both statements are theoretical. …

In the case of Dylann Roof, the truth in practice – the reality that liberals absolutely will not acknowledge – is that keeping guns out of the hands of criminals is an impossibility. This is immaterial in that public safety is not the leftist politicians’ motivation behind advocating for gun control in the first place; the motivation is their totalitarian objectives.

Thus, discussions around eliminating bureaucracy in the concealed carry permitting process and how to keep guns out of the hands of the Dylan Roofs among us are the wrong discussions.

Why?

Continue reading →


Commenting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

You may use HTML in your comments. Feel free to review the full list of allowed HTML here.