Firearms Owners Against Crime
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Former Special Operations Sniper Ryan Cleckner appeared on "Tucker Carlson Tonight" to discuss the 2020 Democrats' gun control proposal. But the best part of the entire interview was Cleckner providing one specific example of a problem with these proposals: the smallest things can make someone a prohibited possessor.
Watch Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtFe85XnN7Q
"There are tons of proposals. None of them are going to work and do anything to stop violent crime, and some of the three worst, you mentioned, they are going to make manufacturers liable? That’s scary. They are may be going to bring back the assault weapons ban, like you said, and register them under the National Firearms Act?" Cleckner asked. "And anyone who’s guilty of a misdemeanor hate crime can lose their right to possess firearms forever. So manufacture liability — you know that’s absurd. You aren’t going to hold BIC lighters liable for arson. Doing that to the firearms industry would absolutely cripple the industry as we know it and I think that’s the plan."
"Anyone who is committed a misdemeanor hate crime — I didn’t even know that was a category, but okay – loses his right to the Second Amendment. He's no longer covered by the Second Amendment but he is still allowed to vote. You aren’t allowed to go deer hunting but you can choose my president. How does that work exactly?" Carlson asked, clearly confused.
"The people coming up with these rules want votes. There's one reason. Here's something scarier: I can talk about a potential slippery slope and say, 'Oh no, we can't do that about hate crimes because who gets to decide what’s a hate crime?'" Cleckner said.
"We have a perfect example right now. If Biden goes to New York City and calls him an illegal alien, he could lose his rights to guns forever under his own proposal because that's a hate crime now. It’s a scary world," Cleckner explained.
New York City recently passed a law that would charge a person with a hate crime and fine them $250,000 for calling someone an "illegal alien"or threatening to call Immigration and Customs Enforcement on them, even if the person really is in the United States illegally. The City's Commission on Human Rights deemed the term "alien" as dehumanizing.
But Carlson brought up a good point: politicians are willing to unarm everyone, except those that are there to protect them.
"His federally-funded bodyguards would be armed with high-capacity magazines. He’s upset, that’s the point. The people who make these rules literally have no intention of abiding by them at all," Carlson replied. "They would never give up their right to firearms because that would be scary."
"Exactly right. They could never answer the hypocrisy of what’s going on. We’ve talked about this before. When a politician tells you don’t need a gun, maybe that’s time you actually need the gun," Cleckner said.
Gun control advocates, like Beto O'Rourke and Joe Biden, aren't smart enough to think of the ramifications of their proposals. They don't think of every possible outcome that can come as a result of their proposed legislation. They simply throw it out there and hope it sticks. But when you start digging and thinking about these laws' implications, you start to realize their flaws.