Question and Answers Call Take Action Protest
United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- One very salient fact that many anti-Second Amendment extremists will not concede is the tragic reality that many of their proposed solutions do not work. Washington, D.C. and Chicago had handgun bans in effect for 25 years – or more – and still saw high murder rates, with the primary weapon of choice being the handgun. Thankfully, thanks to the Heller and McDonald cases, those handgun bans (and all those across America) are no longer in force.
Just recently, the mayor of Chicago attacked Senator Ted Cruz for having the temerity to point out some of the violence that the onerous laws in the Windy City do nothing to prevent. Now, we’ve seen with Project Exile that actually enforcing laws like the prohibition on felons possessing firearms (18 USC 922(g)) can make a huge difference – and it won’t impact the law-abiding gun owners. Just look at the ones cited in this NRA release.
The mayor, determined to deflect attention from a casualty count not too far removed from the Midland-Odessa mass shooting, glosses over that. While in the past, I have counseled against letting anger take over, this is one place where showing a little anger can not only be benign, it may actually help the cause a little.
Imagine being a suburban soccer mom who hears you say, “You bet I’m angry. The mayor of Chicago is demanding that I be punished for crimes I did not commit. What we could do to fix that situation is to enforce existing laws against gun trafficking. Did you know there is a federal law, 18 USC 924(g), that calls for a 10-year sentence if someone crosses state lines to get a gun for the purpose of committing crimes? There is another law, 18 USC 924(b), that calls for a 10-year sentence for those who transport a gun across state lines with the intent to commit a felony. Those two alone would certainly address what she is complaining about, but she doesn’t insist they be used, and we see the tragic results every weekend in the Windy City.”
What that does is first, establish that anti-Second Amendment extremists are trying to perpetrate an injustice. Second, it points out laws that are already on the books. Third, it brings up that the anti-Second Amendment extremist is not demanding that those laws be enforced. Finally, it connects the actions of the anti-Second Amendment extremist in political office to the tragic results of that lack of enforcement.
All of that can be said in less than 45 seconds – which makes it a very good soundbite for the local news. If you really want to shock a local reporter, show them this old column by Wayne LaPierre when Chuck Schumer was trying to push for gun rationing a long time ago. Just a small, five-gun operation can land someone a long jail sentence. The soccer moms who see that soundbite may still be worried, but at least some of them will start to blame anti-Second Amendment politicians like the mayor of Chicago and not Second Amendment supporters for their worries. This is called a good start.
Similarly, for shootings like the ones in Midland, Sutherland Springs, and Charleston, where NICS either did not have the information, or where it denied a purchase but authorities failed to act, the response is just as automatic: “We have politicians calling for background checks, but all too often, we see that either information about convictions or commitment is not entered into the database or when there is a denial, nothing is done. Both of these problems need to be fixed. If a NICS check is denied, it indicates that a prohibited person committed at least one federal felony under 18 USC 922, and there should be an investigation and rapid action, since they tried to acquire a gun. Why should law-abiding citizens be punished when government fails to do its job? If you and I don’t do our job, we get fired.”
Again, in less than 30 seconds, a near-perfect soundbite for local media that takes apart an anti-Second Amendment argument. It again informs people background checks already exist, that the database is flawed, that nothing is done even when the system, works and flags a prohibited person, and asks why law-abiding citizens should pay the price for government incompetence or inaction. Again, worry and anger shifts from the Second Amendment supporter to the anti-Second Amendment extremist.
Now, this won’t convince a Joe Biden or Pete Buttigieg to leave our Second Amendment rights out of their schemes. Based on recent statements, their attitude is clearly comparable to the one displayed by a wolf from one of Aesop’s fables, seeking to rob us of our rights under any pretext they can come up with.
They are not who we need to reach, they just need to be defeated soundly. Our fellow Americans who may have concerns about Second Amendment issues, but who are willing to hear us out, are those we need to reach with our arguments. At best, these newly-enlightened Americans become full-fledged Second Amendment supporters. But just getting them to not vote for an anti-Second Amendment extremist and to consider other issues that could tilt their support to a pro-Second Amendment candidate is good enough for one election cycle – and we can move them our way with further education efforts.
By pointing out the failures of gun control laws, and tying them in to the efforts of Biden, Buttigieg, and others to scapegoat and punish law-abiding citizens, we can secure our Second Amendment rights. If President Trump can win re-election in 2020, and if Mitch McConnel is still Senate Majority Leader, then we could very well see the Supreme Court tilt in a decisively pro-Second Amendment direction.
About Harold Hutchison
Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.