Gun Control for Dummies – and Democrats [Watch Video]

Gun Control for Dummies – and Democrats

Gun control is an issue the Democrats have been selling to people they hope are dummies, for a long time now. In fact, the nature and purpose of guns has been so effectively demonized, that learning anything real about them somehow marks a person as suspect. This conclusion is easily reached, when people notice that “knowledge of firearms” is so abjectly lacking, in the Democrats who most loudly promote gun control.

Most recently, California State Senator Kevin de Leon, the Democrat representing Los Angeles, gave one of the least factually accurate gun demonstrations, ever recorded. The video of his malapropistic demagoguery almost immediately went viral; drawing scorn and derision from gun enthusiasts all over the world. This kind of behavior and evidence of ignorance might be acceptable – or at least excusable – if it were limited to a single Democrat politician. However, the list of high ranking gun control Democrats who are also firearms dummies, is long and distinguished.

Colorado Democrat Rep. Diana DeGette, once famously said that if high-capacity magazines were banned from further commercial sale, they would eventually disappear. She had allowed herself to believe that gun magazines were single use items, which could not be reloaded. She is also the Democrat who told a Senior Citizen – during a question and answer session discussing Colorado’s gun control proposal – that he would “probably be dead anyway” if he needed to defend himself with a firearm.

Gun Control for Dummies – and Democrats

Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein, despite having a conceal/carry permit, seems to have no idea about gun safety whatsoever. Evidently it is perfectly acceptable for her to carry a gun for self protection, but not for the regular American citizens.  Feinstein personally wishes that all regular Americans who legally own guns, could be forced to turn them over to the Government. Which seems rather backwards, when pictures of her handling a semi-automatic rifle in a manner which is particularly dangerous, would indicate she is the one who should be barred; not the other way around. Perhaps Feinstein hoped to further the Democrat cause of gun control, by acting like a complete dummy on the national stage.

Gun control seems to be most stridently argued for, by Democrats who enjoy the security of armed guards; politicians and Hollywood actors alike. The fact of which might lead people to believe that gun control is less about guns, than it is about control. There are, of course, dozens of historical examples of Leftist political leaders and dictators who disarmed their citizens. “For safety.” All of whom eventually turned their armed police and military, on the now disarmed population. Gun control really isn’t so bad, for the people who control the guns.

Marxist, Lenonist, Hitlerian, Castroian and Maoist utopias – along with all their lesser “communist/socialist utopian” brethren – always seem to be just “one more dead dissenter” away from paradise. So, naturally, those kinds of regimes always spout identical rhetoric on the topic of an armed populace, and how “dangerous” it is to live in one.

Popular myth has it that the “wild west” — when universal gun ownership was a given — must have been a lawless, violent, murderous era to live in. Since everyone in the wild west had a gun or two, they must have been offing themselves with regularity. For validation of that idea, simply look to Hollywood and all the movies about the wild west; gun fights happen at least every 15 minutes, on film.

Gun Control for Dummies – and Democrats

The truth, thankfully, is far more mundane: Gun violence per capita during the wild west era was the lowest in national history. Actual gun battles were so rare back then, that the places where they occurred – like the OK Corral – have become monuments. The genuine fear that the other person in the argument can shoot back, seems to instill a sense of civility and chivalry, into every discussion. While that might not always be the case, and certainly there are modern communities where illegal gun ownership and criminal bravado seem to negate those assumptions, that rule has held true for hundreds of years.

Here in America, if some drug-addled berserker uses a gun to commit an atrocity in the midst of unarmed civilians or children, the incident is automatically cited as prima facia evidence that America needs more restrictive gun control laws. In order to make that point, the Democrats never tell the dummies how many existing gun control laws were already broken, in the commission of the crime. Nor do they mention the Harvard study, which categorically refutes any such notions. The study concludes that not only is there no correlation between gun ownership and violent crime, but that as legal gun ownership increases, murder and suicide decreases.

The complete demonization of firearms in general, and “assault” weapons specifically, has only added to the confusion and misunderstanding of guns and gun control laws. The very term “assault weapon” is an indefinable misnomer, but it carries emotional weight and negative connotations; therefore it is tossed around as if it were real terminology. Like Senator de Leon’s “magazine clips,” it is a term which means nothing, but implies all manner bad things.

It is worth asking how many “deadly gun assaults” have taken place at expensive, exclusive, private schools; like the schools our political elites send their own children to. The answer is of course “zero,” because those schools all have well armed security, which often includes the teachers and regular staff.

Why is it, one might ask, that the children of the rich and elite of our society are afforded the safety and security of people who will shoot back, while the children of regular citizens are forced to do without? Is a child somehow less precious, if her parents are relatively economically disadvantaged? Does a parent’s membership in a governing body make their children more important than those of everyone else? Gun violence against school children happens exclusively in “Gun Free Zone” schools, not in secured private schools. There is a lesson worth learning, in that little bit of information.

Democrats will argue that a child might overcome an armed teacher, wrestle the gun away and continue on with their rampage. Again, how often has that happened in private schools where most of the staff is armed? Once more, the answer is never.

These facts and arguments are available to everyone, yet the Democrat drum beat for more and stricter gun control laws continues like a metronome. Democrats for gun control will often repeat that America ranks right near the top in gun violence per capita, among industrialized nations. Which is true, unless you remove the cities of Detroit, New Orleans, Chicago, Oakland and Baltimore – which are all cities with extraordinary gun control laws. With those cities out of the picture, America is ranked down in the bottom three for per capita gun violence.

Democrats are attempting to re-write the “Gun Control for Dummies” story into a tale fraught with misinformation, misleading statements, unfounded fears and truly stupid assumptions. Proving – without knowing it – that the Democrat push for gun control is not about guns, at all; it is only about control.

Editorial by Ben Gaul

Sources:

Harvard.edu                    Pat Dollard                      Daily Beast

InfoWars.com                Breitbart                           Independent Journal Review

Click Here if you think YOU could write for the Liberty Voice