Politico is reporting this morning that Democrats seem to be eating their own over the issue of guns, an observation that reinforces their image as “the party of gun control” firmly in the grasp of left-liberal extremists bent on turning the Second Amendment into a government-regulated privilege, if not a historical footnote.
This perspective comes on the heels of yesterday’s essay in The Week, in which writer Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry suggested that all pretenses about “reasonable” gun laws were off the minute President Barack Obama and candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton “praised Australia’s mandatory gun buyback laws.” What happened Down Under several years ago is well known among America’s firearms owners.
“(T)heir comments did break one of the left’s big taboos of gun control rhetoric (and confirmed one of the right’s worst fears),” Gobry observed, “by admitting that liberals don’t just want restrictions on sale and use, but actually want to force people to hand over their guns.”
A strikingly similar sentiment appeared in yesterday’s Charlotte Observer, under the byline of E. Gregory Wallace, a Campbell University School of Law professor. He asserted that “Many gun-control advocates don’t like guns and don’t want anyone having guns.”
Could an Australian-type “mandatory government gun buyback” work in the United States? Weigh in below in the “Comments” section.
“Their endgame is not gun control,” Wallace stated, “but gun confiscation. Obama has pointed to the mass confiscation of guns in Australia as a model for the United States – despite the fact that the Australian ban had no effect on firearm homicides. Current gun-control proposals are just intermediate steps toward registration, then confiscation.”
This presents a dilemma of monumental proportions to some gun owners in the Puget Sound Basin and Willamette Valley, and well beyond those environs. There are some staunch pro-rights Democrats in rural Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana, but their party appears to be off the rails with the far left at the controls when it comes to the Second Amendment.
If Gobry and Politico’s Elena Schneider are right, the party and its financial backers are engaging in social bigotry and political demagoguery of the worst sort. Evidently, if one supports the entire Bill of Rights, and has a voting record consistent to that principle, they don’t want your kind around here.
There is perhaps no more damning evidence about the party’s intentions than a quote to Politico from Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, an arm of anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s “astroturf” gun prohibition lobbying group Everytown for Gun Safety. Watts has embraced all manner of gun control over the past few years.
“It’s now a wedge issue, not just between Democrats and Republicans, but between Democrats, over who can be the strongest on this issue,” Watts said.
“This issue” is gun control. Not “gun safety” or “gun responsibility,” which have become sham labels for what anti-gunners truly crave.
President Obama, Clinton and other leading Democrats have pulled off the gloves in recent months. They want to ban modern sport-utility rifles, putting the lie to any claim that “nobody is coming to take your guns.” They like the Australian “mandatory buy back” as a model. If it is “mandatory,” it is not a “buy back.” It is confiscation with some compensation, and it is not a “buy back” because the government never owned those guns in the first place.
Both pieces by Schneider and Gobry should be required reading for gun owners. These people are not your father’s Democrats, nor your grandfather’s. It appears that diversity be damned in favor of agenda allegiance.
Got an opinion about this column? Share your views in the “Comments” section below.