An amazing case for reducing gun ownership in America

gettyimages-517331638.jpg

Bettmann / Getty
Don't Forget: The Infamous ‘Dred Scott’ Decision Was Largely About Preventing Blacks From Owning Guns
Black lives matter.
by MICHAEL J. KNOWLESMarch 6, 2018


On this 161st anniversary of the Supreme Court’s infamous decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford to deny American citizenship to any black person, whether slave or free, the mainstream media have uniformly overlooked a key feature of that grave miscarriage of justice: the decision was rendered in large part to prevent blacks from owning guns. Politico correctly observes that Dred Scott is “widely regarded as one of the Supreme Court’s worst decisions” and “an egregious example of seeking to impose a judicial solution to a political problem,” but it fails to articulate the civil rights central to that political problem.


The Dred Scott decision invalidated the Missouri Compromise of 1820, subsequently permitting slavery in every federal territory. Chief Justice Roger Taney went further to declare blacks “an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” Taney recognized the ultimate contradiction at the heart of American slavery: if the human dignity described in the Declaration of Independence rests upon natural rights, then those rights are natural to black people as well as white, or they are not. If blacks possess natural rights, then slavery is an unnatural and intolerable evil; if they lack natural rights, blacks simply never can become American citizens, be they born slave or free.

Taney’s decision may rank among the worst in Supreme Court history, but it threw into stark relief the social problem that within eight years would send 600,000 American men to their graves to resolve. Citizenship, Taney knew, “would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right … to keep and carry arms wherever they went … endangering the peace and safety of the State.” The Civil War resolved that dispute. Democrats, displeased by the war’s conclusion, spent the next century attempting to deprive freed men of their dearly won, constitutionally protected civil rights in part by enacting and expanding the nation’s first gun control laws. These regulations aimed specifically to disarm liberated blacks, who knew too well the urgency of the Second Amendment.


Would-be tyrants crop up in every age to deny the natural rights of man. Fortunately Americans still possess the means to put them down.
 
7, 2018
New FBI stats counter the media's anti-gun culture war
By Joseph Smith
A liberal media "eager to find a tipping point in the gun debate" declare that Second Amendment-supporters "are losing the culture war against guns" and that gun sales are "plummeting" because "Americans don't buy gun control threats." But the FBI's new report on firearms background checks contradicts that media narrative.

Background checks for February 2018 reached the second-highest February level ever, even exceeding the February 2013 level reached after President Obama issued 23 executive orders on gun safety as a response to the Newton, Conn. shooting.

February 2018 background check numbers were exceeded only by February 2016, when Hillary Clinton, who had previously advocated "an Australian-style" "gun buyback," was the frontrunner for president. And February 2018 results were all but completed when President Trump made comments in a meeting with lawmakers that unnerved Second Amendment-supporters on the last day of the month.

Statistics on firearm background checks, it should be noted, "do not represent the number of firearms sold, as the FBI says, but are viewed as a proxy estimate for actual gun sales numbers.

The media campaign to promote new gun controls and demoralize Second Amendment-supporters has featured such recent headlines as:

  • "Conservatives are losing the culture war over guns"
  • "Trump gun slump: Sales plummet as Americans don't buy gun control threats"
  • "'Trump slump' for gun sales isn't reversing"
  • "Thanks To 'Trump Slump,' shops have more guns than buyers"
Peter Beinart's culture war column at theatlantic.com cites corporations cutting ties with the NRA, along with the CNN town hall booing of NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch, to make that case "Americans' attitudes" toward guns "are changing." Beinart may be describing the intent, rather than the result, of the media campaign:

Even when conservatives win elections and pass laws, they look at the trend among cultural elites – the media, Hollywood, universities, even corporations – and feel like they're losing.

But could it be the cultural elites who are losing? The FBI report also indicates that by the end of this year, there will have been more than 300 million background checks in the twenty years of record-keeping. Americans like firearms, and they like them more than ever, no matter what the cultural elites want us to think.

More inHome

World's smallest violin plays for illegals who are afraid to take food stamps


Elect Rick Saccone in Pennsylvania


Saudi crown prince shocks Islamists with bold moves in Egypt


Innovation in fast food industry making 'Fight for Fifteen' irrelevant


Thrashing around with a non-story on collusion, the press gets despicable
Two anecdotal accounts from recent gun shows illustrate another trend (emphasis added):

At a Tampa, FL gun show one vendor "estimated that only 10 percent of gun show shoppers were firearms aficionados. The rest, he said, are either newcomers or dabblers."

And at a Waukesha, WI gun show a vendor said "I think a lot of new buyers do come into the market as soon as it's in the news. They're going well maybe I should go get one before they ban them."

One could argue that the media culture war campaign is having the opposite effect of that intended: Alana Abramson at time.com writes that "membership in the NRA and gun rights groups across the country ... is spiking."

Abramson quotes the head of Georgia Gun Owners, who says, "As soon as anti-gun attacks started coming in on Twitter, Facebook, and in the media, we began to hear from people who didn't even own guns who wanted to join up or contribute out of solidarity in defense of the Second Amendment to the Constitution."

The head of the Nevada Firearms Coalition says: "Gun owners themselves weren't being demonized [after Las Vegas], ut after the Florida shooting, there was a definite push to demonize honest gun owners and to demonize the NRA. And I think that's what's provoked their response."

Describing the post-Florida increase in gun control activism, Abramson quotes an NRA board member who says:

We've never had this level of opposition before, not ever. It's a campaign of lies and distortion, but it's very well funded and they are playing on the sympathy factor of kids getting killed.

The time.com piece gives the last word to Shannon Watts, "the founderof Moms Demand Action," who, in another case of projection by the left, says of "the gun lobby" what really applies to the anti-gun movement:

They specialize in exploiting shooting tragedies
 
Sheriff Joe said:

The 2nd Amendment Isn't About Hunting: It's About Self-Defense


Battle-Rev-War-domain.png


by AWR Hawkins10 Jan 201342

10 Jan, 2013 10 Jan, 2013
contributor-80x100-awrhawkins.png


When Gov. Cuomo argued against guns with magazines that hold 10 rounds on Jan. 9, he tried to justify it by saying, “No one hunts with an assault rifle. No one needs 10 rounds to kill a deer.”
Problem one: He’s wrong in the same way Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) was wrong when he said no one hunts with an AR-15. Tons of people hunt with these kinds of rifles.

Problem two: It isn’t about hunting — never has been, never will be.

The 2nd Amendment wasn’t given to us to protect our right to duck or deer hunt but to defend our lives and our property and to repel tyranny, period.

When the left twists the 2nd Amendment to make it about hunting, they do so to effectively cut all non-hunters out of the equation, which lessens the size of the opposition by lopping off those who own guns for other purposes (self-defense). And this also gives them grounds to limit guns and gun-types based on hunting applications.



However, this is a specious tactic at best, because the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting.

As the Supreme Court said in both their District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago decisions, “individual self defense is “the central component‘ of the Second Amendment Right.” (italics in original)

This is not an argument against hunting. It’s just a reminder that that’s not the reason the Founding Fathers wanted us to be armed.
Click to expand...
Obvi.
 
Sheriff Joe said:

The 2nd Amendment Isn't About Hunting: It's About Self-Defense
Click to expand...

As usual, conservatives are driven by fear.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...re-differs-between-liberals-and-conservatives

What does all of this mean? Basically it accounts for why conservatives are more sensitive to threat or anxiety in the face of uncertainty, while liberals tend to be more open to new experiences. The study occured in London, with MRI's performed on students who defined themselves as liberal or conservative.
 
Wez said:
As usual, conservatives are driven by fear.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...re-differs-between-liberals-and-conservatives

What does all of this mean? Basically it accounts for why conservatives are more sensitive to threat or anxiety in the face of uncertainty, while liberals tend to be more open to new experiences. The study occured in London, with MRI's performed on students who defined themselves as liberal or conservative.
Click to expand...
"As usual liberals are intolerant cowards"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top