Here's Why Liberals Are Suddenly Embracing The 2nd Amendment

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Shaun Bradley via TheAntiMedia.org,

Bureaucrats in California are ringing in the new year by doubling down on their failed policies to stop gun violence. As of January 1st, six new bills are being phased in that close the so-called ‘bullet-button’ loophole and require background checks to buy ammunition. Another policy would have banned magazines that hold over ten rounds, but in a surprise move, the magazine restriction was repealed on December 29th, just ahead of the deadline. Although California has always been a poster child for the progressive agenda, support for these extreme measures seems to have faded — especially since the result of the presidential election.

These new standards were signed by Governor Jerry Brown in the wake of the San Bernardino attack last December, and in many ways, they mimic the registry created in Connecticut after Sandy Hook. Even though the changes solidify California’s status as the most draconian state when it comes to gun rights, public opinion may be at a turning point.

The reality of a Trump administration has shocked many Californians into a newfound appreciation for the 2nd Amendment. Since November, there has been a record number firearms sold in the Golden State — and many of those buying them are liberals. Hopefully, instead of being blinded by identity politics, this can be a moment for both parties to realize gun ownership is a necessary check on centralized power. The 2nd Amendment has long been a point of contention between the left and the right, but perhaps a year like 2016 is what was needed to find some common ground.

Regardless of one’s beliefs, when the president has far-reaching, violative power, concerns of authoritarianism will inevitably come from both sides of the political spectrum. An armed populace, though, has much less to fear from the whims of a dictator, whether they are a fascist or a socialist.

Yet if the original magazine ban hadn’t been repealed, thousands of innocent people would have been turned into felons overnight. Those who don’t comply with the numerous other new stipulations are still at risk.

For this reason, those who oppose the drug war should empathize with gun owners who find themselves in the crosshairs of the State. People who have experimented safely with marijuana or psychedelics understand that when used responsibly, they can be important tools in improving quality of life. That’s why it’s infuriating to see politicians who have never experienced the benefits of these substances make laws that put people in jail for simply possessing a plant.

But why isn’t there the same anger when politicians who have never been in a fight or shot a gun (yet are protected by armed bodyguards) create laws criminalizing individuals’ choices on how they defend themselves? The drug war uses law enforcement on non-violent people to enforce arbitrary victimless crimes, but it is just as immoral when law-abiding gun owners are targeted by the State at the behest of a fearful public.

This targeting amounts to the collectivization of millions of people, the vast majority of whom will never harm anyone. In the same way, the majority of cannabis or psychedelic users do not harm others — let alone themselves — proving blanket bans unreasonably violate the rights of non-violent individuals.

Further, instances where firearms are used in self-defense are almost never covered by the press —  but lives saved by guns should carry significant weight in the discussion. Taking away legal firearms only limits options for those who become victims when the police aren’t close enough to intervene. Obviously, not everyone has the desire to carry a firearm, just as there are many people who have no interest in using drugs, but entrusting government as the mediator of what is reasonable and ethical is a fatal mistake that has been highlighted throughout history.

The well-known tactics of doublespeak and problem-reaction-solution have been deployed on the public to link society’s perception of gun ownership to criminality. Terms like bullet-button, high-capacity, automatic rifle, and ghost gun are all manipulative words that have been used to confuse those who aren’t assimilated into American gun culture. With little personal experience on which to base their opinions, many liberals unquestionably accept the State’s assertions that guns are to blame — accusations that inevitably follow these tragic scenarios.

Unfortunately, the government has a poor track record of addressing the root cause of the issue and not just a symptom of the disease. There is no amount of laws that can be written to solve the underlying societal problems driving the violence, and like it or not, the weapons of millions of Americans are here to stay. When crucial information from the media is being intentionally omitted, the result can be just as deceptive as an outright lie.

Even the infamous false claim that there were 355 mass shootings in 2015 made its rounds and was regurgitated on major networks. But deliberate wording was used to skew the data and guide the public’s reaction. Out of those 355 incidents, only a handful resulted in any loss of life, even though the audience associated mass shootings with the few mass murders they had seen broadcast non-stop.

The source of the data is a site called Mass Shooting Tracker, and their calculations are vastly different than most would assume. The organization clearly states how they define mass shootings on their web page:

The current FBI definition of mass murder, commonly accepted by the media as a proxy for ‘mass gun violence,’ is three or more people murdered in one event. We believe this does not capture the whole picture. Many people may survive a shooting based on luck aloneOur definition is this: a mass shooting is an incident where four or more people are shot in a single shooting spree. This may include the gunman himself, or police shootings of civilians around the gunman.”

The statistics echoed throughout the mainstream media to convince the public that we’re in the midst of a mass shooting epidemic — and that assault rifles are largely to blame — has been a spectacle. Even something as simple as the number of gun deaths is consistently inflated by the rate of suicides, which are often included in tallies. The gun control position would at least have some integrity if they went after the weapons that are used in 68% of all murders — handguns. But instead of standing on the values they preach, gun control advocates turn to emotional manipulation that undermines logic to target rifles, which account for only 3% of all murders. FBI reports have consistently shown an overall decrease in violent crime, but only cities that have instituted the strictest gun control, like Chicago, have fallen victim to unprecedented turmoil — turmoil that, if state gun laws worked, would be avoided.

The democratic nature of the United States is only valuable if it remains representative of all opinions without marginalizing the rights of the minority. The rise of the Calexit movement has created a unique opportunity to open up the debate on the issue of state rights, which until now has mostly been associated with right-wing parts of the country.

Hopefully, the perfect storm of political upheaval and government overreach can bring people together behind individual freedom. The new laws being implemented in California exemplify a failed solution to a complex problem. If 2016 did one thing, it highlighted the differences in values and vision that separate the ideologies of the nation. In the pursuit of diversity, the differences in ideas have been placed on the back burner, but if progress that is more than skin deep is going to be made, then all views — even the unpleasant ones — need to be heard.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Chupacabra-322's picture

Can't wait to see the expression on their faces when we try to take away their Guns.

38BWD22's picture

 

 

Until proven otherwise, my contention is that the more guns American society has, the better.  Even if liberals own some.

:)

More guns is bad for tyrants.

oberonsbane's picture

I own guns but thinking that an AR-15 will somehow save you from a tyrannical government is delusional. Never bring a gun to a drone fight. The only thing that AR-15 will do is get pried from cold dead hands.

Korprit_Phlunkie's picture

History shows otherwise. Plus it doesn't have to be a tyrannical govt. What about a tyrannical muslim looking for supposed virgins?

MalteseFalcon's picture

I'm hoping California steals all of the guns from all Californians.

So when civil war II is declared, Union troops can drive straight to the governor's mansion in Sacramento and seize moonbeam.

Then we can re-open the WWII Japanese-American internment camps and herd California politicians straight into the camps.

No innocents, like the children, will be harmed.

"I'd like to thank the Nobel Peace Prize committee...."

FUBO's picture

So, we didn't use drones in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.? 

Nekoti's picture

What chance do you stand without them?

sun tzu's picture

A bunch of rice farmers and goat herders with AK-47s did

Vin's picture

Then don't buy one.  It's still a free country, sort of.

Raffie's picture

So are we now to be be anti-gun and mock them?

I'm confused....

FUBO's picture

Don't mock them. just realize how hypocritical they are and carry on.

N2OJoe's picture

Yes, DO mock them and mercilessly drive home the stupidity and shame their past pro-tyranny statements.

Nekoti's picture

Just welcome them to the club and hope they have seen the light.

Raffie's picture

Some of them I might have to make special SALTED AMMO for them.

canisdirus's picture

Honestly, I'm hopeful. Usually when people learn about how to safely use guns they become much more reasonable and involved. Realizing you have something in your hands that you have to respect and that can take a life gives you a very different perspective on life.

My left-wing friends are often shocked and inquisitive when they learn that I own guns, since they don't see me as "the type" in their heads. I always offer to show them if they want to, since most have never seen a gun that wasn't being worn by a police officer or on a screen, let alone touched one. Some take me up on it, some don't. If they do, I use the time to teach them about guns, how to handle them safely, show them that I'm careful in storing them, and answer any questions they have. It has always been very good for them.

The cognitive dissonance it causes helps break their false belief systems they've built up about gun and the people that own them.

It's better to have them as allies than enemies on this front...

knukles's picture

Hah.
CA's sphincter's already prolapsed and the man's not even yet sworn in.
Plus the state has hired AG Holder to fight Trump. 
Honest.

38BWD22's picture

 

 

Saw that re Holder.  LOL.

Holder would know all about distributing guns...

nmewn's picture

...legally or otherwise.

I wonder how California Hispanics are taking Eric "Fast & Furious" Holders entrance stage left? ;-)

Dr. Engali's picture

A lib with a gun, now that's funny. What good is it going to do then when they lock it, take the bolt out, and put in the safe with their bullet stored in another room?

JusticeTBuford's picture

Hang on, hang on, before you kick my door in.... I need 15 minutes to prepare.

The Saint's picture
The Saint (not verified) JusticeTBuford Jan 4, 2017 8:43 PM

That's where lying comes in. Yell out,  "I'm armed and will kill my hostage if you try to come in."  That gives you time to get your gun, your bolt, your ammo, the key to your trigger guard, your kevlar vest, your shooting glasses, your knee pads, your Vietnam era helmet, your hand grenades, write your will.  Well most of that stuff anyway.

Plus, once your have told them that you have a hostage, you are free to let anybody leave the house (including yourself) under the pretense that they are a hostage being released.  The police/feds NEVER want to be in the news for shooting a hostage by mistake and will always back off and let hostages run out of the house to cover.

And, if at some point they try to claim you lied by saying you were holding a hostage, you just tell the court that you just said that you were "Eating a sausage."  LOL

 

LetThemEatRand's picture

The fact that Presidential election outcomes cause large groups of Americans to buy guns says everything you need to know about how fucked up and divided this country has become.  I say this as a long-time staunch supporter of the Second.

seek's picture

I remember in the 80s, they used to go after handguns. Remember the Brady's used to be Handgun Control, Inc.

That didn't go so well, so they changed their tactics to go after scary-looking guns and take advantage of the fact that people confused semi-auto rifles with machine guns.

Of course, now that the AR-15 is one of the most popular rifles in America, that's not working too well either.

It's pretty amusing that these idiots have effectively disarmed themselves in their own stronghold states.

Chupacabra-322's picture

Exactly how they've segregated themselves at the College's and Universities.

"Liberalism is a disease."
-NoDebt.

risk.averse's picture

 

so they changed their tactics to go after scary-looking guns and take advantage of the fact that people confused semi-auto rifles with machine guns.

yes, this tactic worked brilliantly in Australia. It saw *all* semi-auto long guns effectively banned in the late 1990s. The MSM *all* demanded semi-auto bans after the Port Arthur massacre in 1996 (when some retard -- whom the keystone cops in Tasmania knew was dangerous but were too apathetic to get him off the streets -- killed a bunch of tourists with a AR-15 and a FN FAL, both stolen; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia) )

The MSM then easily convinced the government that ALL semi-autos were equivalent to machine guns. Thanks to ignorance and a steady diet of gun-crazy Hollywood action movies -- popular in the 1980s and 90s -- that seemed to be the only reference point for the gun-phobic (i.e  the majority of the populace), very tight laws were passed in response.

The irony now is that Australians are incapable of defending themselves. They went from being a largely rural population back in the early 20th century -- when the Aussie country boys in World War 1 all could shoot and were feared on the battlefield -- to the largely urban populace these days. Australia relies on the ANZUS Treaty with America for its defence. If it wasn't for the ANZUS "umbrella", Australian taxpayers would have pay tens of billions $$ more than they do already to replace the defensive capability that America now provides Australia for free. Tax money that now goes to pay welfare and buy votes for Australian politicians would have to be spent on defence. Hmmm...on a side-note, I wonder if Trump may start getting Australia to pay its way more???

Sure, having a gun in some Aussie homes isn't going to stop the neighbouring Indonesian army (currently trained by the Australian Army -- I kid you not!) or the Chinese from invading but -- just as the French, Italian and Yugoslav resistance proved in WW2 -- you can tie them down etc. If it wasn't for the French resistance, France -- which rolled-over for the Nazis would have had zero self-respect after WW2.

silverer's picture

Does this mean white liberal murders of other white liberals will increase dramatically?

navy62802's picture

No. It means that white liberal suicides by gun will increase.

We Are The Priests's picture

No joke, some idiot asked me the other day if it was necessary to unload his weapon before cleaning it.  Needless to say I dropped him from the class.

navy62802's picture

LOL!!! Good move dropping that person from the class.

We Are The Priests's picture

Yeah, 99% of gun safety is common sense.  I judged this person to have none.  I'm not a total SOB, though.  I refunded him his money.

dexter_morgan's picture

I recently went through a 16 hour required course in Illinois to get my concealed carry license. It was a lot of fun and very educational as to the law and what happens post-incident. At breaks and during lunch they showed videos of the results of being careless with guns. This was at a gun store/range and the 2 guys also shared a lot of stories about idiots they turned away for the very same type of stuff. 

These guys were avid shooters, firm believers in gun rights, but they balanced that with sobering information and graphics to underline the seriousness of carrying, as well as just using them. Frequent range time is a must if you plan to carry, as well as practicing draw (with UNLOADED gun of course), or you are just likely to get yourself killed and give the perp a new weapon. 

Actually, best thing they taught was situational awareness and AVOIDING conflicts whenever possible as the best defense. 

navy62802's picture

The most eye-opening experience for me in my training was trying to draw with your hands over your head. A person moving moderately quickly can cover roughly 7 feet per second. If your draw time is 1 second, it takes another .5 seconds to put the pistol on-target and another .5 seconds to pull the trigger, then somoene 14 feet away moving at moderate speed will be able to overtake you before you draw from the holster and fire. Just something to remember in an engagement scenario. This is also a valuable piece of insight if you are ever on the other end of the gun.

Rey dTutto's picture

A holstered gun is near useless within 10 meters/30-odd feet, and completely useless within 5 meters/16 feet.

We Are The Priests's picture

Avoid and evade is always preferable to having to use deadly force defense.  And yes, alsways practice drawing your sidearm with an unloaded weapon; having ten toes on each foot is critical to proper balance.

Carpe Tutti Bastardi's picture

..............." And yes, alsways (sic) practice drawing your sidearm with an unloaded weapon;

having ten toes on each foot is critical to proper balance.

All I can say is WHATTTT? LOL

Richard Head's picture

10 round limit is still the law for ordinary citizens. You have to be law enforcement or have grandfathered magazines to have anything more than 10. This "repeal" was no win for 2A supporters.

SgtShaftoe's picture

The "grandfather" dies in june.  All standard cap mags have to be out of the state or destroyed...

We Are The Priests's picture

My side business as a security/survival consultant has trippled since the election.  It would be more but I've turned away a large number of potential customers whom I deemed to be far more dangerous with a gun in their hand than without; most of them have been liberal white guys from the city with delusions of being Rambo in a Madd Max/Thunderdome scenario.

Not that I think things will go all Madd Max, but if they do, I'm doing what I can to keep the threat of real idiots with guns down to a minimum.

SgtShaftoe's picture

God bless you.  Please give each turned-away customer a copy of "The Law" by Bastiat.  Maybe something will stick. 

Francis Marx's picture

This is just one more story to show that liberals are the biggest hypocrites. Everyone of them I know are.

VWAndy's picture

 Why settle for one set of standards? Its way more easy and fun with two.

BadDog's picture

Those FEMA camps may not be looking so spiffy to the hard left now.

oberonsbane's picture

Maybe they'll take over a bird sanctuary.

SgtShaftoe's picture

People I know that fall into that camp keep their gun in the mfr box in the closet with a single 20rd box of ammo.  Then they never shoot it or train with it.  So essentially, long story short: they're storing it for the person who is going to take it from them. 

espirit's picture

Having been an RSO at the local club for almost 25 years, every duty day I'd thought I'd seen it all - not so.

Off the rack rifles in factory boxes with chamber flags broken off in the bores, wrong ammo pounded into chambers, grandads rifle stored in the corner for 40+ years with a round stuck in chamber, actions and bores so unclean it would probably blow, ad infinitum. Not to mention sights, scopes, lights, lasers, and bore sighters being flung or shot out in all directions.

 

Over half the firearms out there just won't work as intended, sad as it is to say.

Dr.Carl's picture

Liberals are losing it. If conservatives EVER behaved the way they are they would be screaming.

 

My theory is to let them be. They are cooking their own goose. 

 

They will eliminate one another. See all the potty mouths on here.  That my friend is the liberal mindset. They cannot hold an intelligent conversation so they use profanity.