Home»Commentary»A Comparison of Techniques in Defending the Second Amendment

A Comparison of Techniques in Defending the Second Amendment

0
Shares
Pinterest Google+
 

Article first appeared at Ammoland.com

United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- In the past months, I have emphasized that it is not enough to fight hard for our Second Amendment rights, Second Amendment supporters need to fight smart, too. In today’s very hostile media climate, the approach we use in defending our rights will define how we come across to our fellow Americans. It might sound repetitive, but as we saw with the Ask Amy column which became a fiasco thanks to responses from some that were ill-thought out (at best), it is necessary.

Loyal Ammoland readers are very passionate about their Second Amendment rights. This is a good thing. When Beto O’Rourke and Eric Swalwell talk about mandatory buybacks of modern multi-purpose semi-automatic firearms, they seek to perpetrate an injustice in the form of punishing millions of Americans who did nothing wrong by infringing on their rights.

They are in the wrong, along with Everytown for Gun Safety, Michael Bloomberg, March for Our Lives, the Brady Campaign, and other anti-Second Amendment groups and politicians.

Those who have stood against the injustices that those groups seek to inflict on law-abiding Americans, like the NRA, and other pro-Second Amendment groups, are in the right by defending the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

But while we know the facts and the truth about the purpose of the Second Amendment’s protection of our natural rights, far too many Americans don’t. How we talk about Second Amendment issues could determine if these Americans eventually see things our way or if they instead choose to go along with the likes of Beto O’Rourke, Eric Swalwell, Cory Booker, and Dianne Feinstein.

The fury we all feel about the intended infliction of injustice is a righteous anger. However, if we let that anger control us, we risk doing more harm than good. So, I’d like you to put yourself in the position of a suburban parent. They don’t own guns, they work, they take their kids to school and soccer games, and their knowledge of Second Amendment issues is often what is in the local paper and the news. You’re a neighbor they’ve been on friendly terms with, and maybe they’ve seen you wearing a NRA hat or noticed something that reveals your Second Amendment support. I’ll post two responses to a possible question or statement they might ask or make. Then ask yourself which one would be more likely to convince you to support the Second Amendment.

RELATED:  The Second Amendment Is A First Priority

“That school shooting was horrible, why did it happen?”

  1. “People – real, live, allegedly lucid people – actually believe that this ‘shooting’ was real? Wow. That is difficult to believe. Just watch a single one of the interviews of the crisis actors involved and tell me with a straight face that the person has just witnessed about a dozen people being gunned down.”
  2. “I think wild guesses about what caused this won’t do anybody any good. It’s better to wait for the facts to find out what happened in this case. Right now, I’m just keeping the victims in my prayers.”

“Some Congressman wants to ban assault rifles and require people to turn them in. Do you think that’s a good idea?”

  1. “From my cold dead hands.”
  2. “What he is proposing is the infliction of a massive injustice on millions of Americans who had nothing to do with this or any other shooting by infringing on their rights. Justice Department statistics show that rifles of all types are used in murders less often than clubs, bare hands, or knives.”

“What is so bad about a red flag law?”

  1. “This American ain’t surrendering anything!”
  2. “The problem is that many of the proposals have serious problems, including a lack of due process and the failure to require those who are subjected to extreme risk orders to receive mental health treatment. In addition, civil commitment is another legal option on the books for individuals who are a threat to themselves or others. Sadly, those currently in office are unable or unwilling to use that option as well. But they are almost immediately demanding new laws in the wake of these tragedies.”

“But how can we address gun violence?”

  1. “Could you please kindly pull your head out of your butt, STFU and go away…. pretty please?”
  2. “There are solutions. We could enforce existing laws on the books to put away people with criminal records that illegally possess firearms. We can use harsh sentences for those who misuse guns in the course of committing crimes. We also support better policing. All too often, these tragedies can be prevented with tools that are available, but which those currently in office are unable or unwilling to use. Yet they are always demanding new laws on guns that target law-abiding citizens.”
RELATED:  Is The Mainstream Media Promoting Murder or Working to Stop It?

“Why do you oppose universal background checks?”

  1. “Get your skull out of your backside and start standing firm on the constitution and the Second Amendment as written.”
  2. “Because background checks have not worked to prevent crime. Justice Department studies show that criminals acquire their guns illegally, usually through straw purchases, theft, or the black market. And mass shooters often pass background checks. Furthermore, in the past, anti-Second Amendment groups opposed instant background checks in favor of waiting periods.”

“So why do you oppose a license and registration for guns when we need a license to drive a car?”

  1. “Every one of these schemes are just a way to infringe and violate the Second Amendment rights of citizens.”
  2. “Licensing and registration schemes only would apply to law-abiding citizens. Courts have ruled that those prohibited from owning guns cannot be required to register guns, because it would violate their right against self-incrimination. In any case, criminals break the law to acquire their guns, usually through theft, straw purchases, or on the black market. Furthermore, some of the initial licensing laws, like New York’s Sullivan Act, were intended to deny Irish and Italian immigrants the right to have handguns for personal protection. Furthermore, many groups seeking gun control want registration in order to facilitate confiscation – which would be a massive injustice against millions of law-abiding Americans who have committed no crime.”

Again, I would encourage loyal Ammoland readers to compare these responses, placing themselves in the position of a fellow American who is on the fence, or leaning toward backing anti-Second Amendment legislation. Ask yourself, “Which response is more likely to make me more willing back the Second Amendment, or at least be willing to hear more?” Once you have come up with the answer, act accordingly.


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.

Don't forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Previous post

Legally Buying a Gun Isn’t So Easy After All

Next post

Gun Rights Under Attack - Get Ready to Keep Your’s By Force