Firearms Owners Against Crime
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
“Want to fight crime? Take on the gun lobby,” opinion columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. writes for The Washington Post. “Who is really ‘soft on crime?’ The gun lobby and all who coddle it, particularly those who serve in the U.S. Senate and on the Supreme Court.”
Yeah, take a second with that—the gaslighting is strong in this one and he’s been doing it for years.
The problem he declares without substantiation because that’s his M.O., starts with “politicians and jurists who offer abstract and ahistorical readings of the Second Amendment to prevent mayors, police officers and lawmakers from getting guns off our streets.”
The violence monopolists are back to their pre-Heller “collective right” nonsense, where they lie and say no one ever considered the Second Amendment to be about individual rights until the NRA started getting political in the Sixties. Don’t tell us, E.J., tell Tench Coxe.
The “Defund the Police” slogan is “dead as a doornail,” E.J. then insists, trying to amplify President Brand… Biden’s disingenuous attempt at distancing Democrats from the party’s most shrill, loudest, newest, and growing voices before the midterms. Again, don’t tell us, tell Cori Bush and her constituents.
Like it’s a coincidence Dems are also trying to rewrite history and redirect their messaging on COVID-19. They’re so blatant about it, it’s tough to choose who offers a better analogy: Stalin for “disappearing” history or Orwell, for flat-out in-your-face reversing polarity.
You can see what’s going on from a recent CNN headline:
“Biden turns his focus to gun violence as Democrats try to shed ‘defund the police’ label”
Otherwise, more voters may start to become aware of and question things like Soros prosecutors, the utter failure of places with the most stringent “gun laws” to keep violent crime from going anywhere but up, and how elites-funded attacks on citizens owning guns universally rely on lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Instead, we’re “treated “ to blather from Eric Adams, New York City’s new mayor, who wants to set up Iron Curtain-style gun “checkpoints” to plug what the antis call the “Iron Pipeline.” Left unsaid is why people in states where the guns come from don’t seem to have the same difficulties handling freedom that plague urban Democrats, and that it’s not much of a “flow” when the average time-to-crime into New York is over 10 years.
E.J. excels at disregarding anything that veers off-narrative and instead repeats the Biden/disarmament lobby lie about rights not being “absolute” (of course they are up to the point they infringe on the rights of others, hence the reason why the right to keep and bear arms does not extend to threatening or shooting someone without justification, and the right to free speech does not include libel, fraud and the like). He wants to ban “assault weapons” and “ghost guns. He wants registration-enabling (and assessed “ineffective” without it) “background check” prior restraints on the right and wants the FBI to be able to take its own sweet time getting around to letting transfers proceed, with your safety concerns not being a factor.
“But no, in a Senate where big cities facing the most serious crime problems are wildly underrepresented, the gun lobby rules,” E.J. writes with a straight face, although not being able to see him he could actually be cracking up with that, particularly noting they’re all Democrat/Bloomberg cities.
And the Supreme Court won’t overturn preemption and allow for a patchwork of impossible-to-navigate “No Guns Zones,” E.J. complains, not using those words, but that’s what he means. It’s revealing how prohibitionists always argue for draconian local bans, and then turn around and demand that national infringements apply to everyone, in Everytown. Evidently, by “home rule,” they mean to rule your home.
Rather than come up with a thoughtful response to why New York City unconstitutionally discriminates on the right to bear arms by requiring licenses only available to the elite chosen few, E.J. resorts to snarky Alinsky Rule 5 ridicule because, in reality, it’s all he’s got.
“[T]he other imperative is to call out the hypocrisy of those who give fiery, divisive speeches about law and order while doing everything in their power to guarantee lawbreakers access to all the weapons they need,” E.J. concludes, knowing full well the NRA (and SAF, it would seem) call for enforcing gun laws, something some of us find self-defeating, short-sighted, and equivalent to American colonists demanding the Crown enforce existing Intolerable Acts.
In any case, what The Washington Post has done here is given out talking points to help spread a desperate, pre-midterms Democrat narrative: It’s not catch-and-release of chronically violent, entitled sociopaths as a means of expediting “cultural transformation” that’s the problem here, it’s your guns!
Expect to see plenty of other DSM outlets, disarmament groups, and politicians lather, rinse and repeat. Being able to refute their lies is important, especially for those who enjoy a “bully pulpit,” but may not be making the most effective use of it.