Demand for More Evidence Only Helps NRA Ignore Amnesty Danger to Gun Rights
Article first appeared at Ammoland.com
Ammoland – Harold Hutchison, consulting senior editor for “Soldier of Fortune” magazine, opposes the recall of Grover Norquist from the NRA Board of Directors. That’s surprising, but speaks well for the magazine’s publisher encouraging independent thought, as Lt. Col. Robert K. Brown, himself an NRA Director, recently came out for the recall.
In making his case, Hutchison challenges some claims I’ve made regarding why I believe Norquist’s immigration position and a “pathway to citizenship” for MILLIONS of foreign nationals will overwhelmingly favor Democrats and anti-gunners. He apparently doesn’t grok why turning over control of the legislatures and the courts to anti-gun Democrats rises even to the threat level of “campaign finance reform.” He demands to know if my fears of cultural terraforming are “legit.”
I guess he hasn’t been to California lately. I guess he hasn’t seen how the California Latino Legislative Caucus disparages the NRA as an “extreme right wing Republican organization” (interesting, that was a reaction to a proposed recall, too). I guess he hasn’t noticed what an unchallengeable Democrat majority feels emboldened to do with Golden State gun laws, already rated strictest by the Brady Campaign.
Perhaps I should have said “cultural landscaping” instead of “cultural terraforming” (although that one was coined by a pal of mine and I actually find it more descriptive). That last link is pretty telling – the influential George Soros-funded Center for American Progressseems to be on board with what’s going on and has taken off running with it, even as Mr. Hutchison is wondering if there’s anything to my concerns.
He wants yet more proof that this reshaping of the electorate in favor of a “progressive” agenda – one that includes a wish list of incremental citizen disarmament edicts – is an actionable concern for gun owners:
For NRA to expand into “scoring” votes on immigration (not to mention re-calling Grover Norquist from the NRA Board of Directors), there needs to be more evidence than just some adverse polling data. There not only needs to be clear and convincing evidence of the “cultural terraforming” cited by Codrea, but also that measures short of going beyond the “single issue” mandate of NRA would be utterly ineffective.
Really? Is there a problem with the “polling data”? Does he have information that what I have presented to date is not “legit”? If not, why even bring it up? Who appointed Hutchison the arbiter of all the hoops that need to be jumped through in order to justify recalling Norquist and scoring votes on immigration? And I must now also prove all other measures will be “utterly ineffective” (as opposed to not effective enough)? Heck, even what I’m proposing won’t be anywhere near enough to fix the problem. Does he have any grasp of its scope, or what it’s going to take to turn things around?
But OK. I give. In addition to the links provided above, here is some “more evidence”:
- PewHispanic.org: “82% of foreign-born Hispanics think controlling gun ownership is more important than protecting gun ownership rights…”
- NewsTaco: “For Latinos gun control is common sense.”
- NBC News: “On Gun Control, A GOP Disconnect With Latino Voters.”
- DCClothesline: “Most Hispanics favor gun control, a Democrat-controlled Congress, and Hillary as president.”
- Talking Points Memo: “Huge Majority of Latinos Back Stricter Gun Laws.”
- Latino Decisions: “Latino voters favor gun restrictions.”
- The Washington Times: “Hispanics already in Democratic corner for 2016.”
Look, we could keep this up all day. If that’s not enough “evidence” for him, I note his LinkedIn profile claims he’s a “Fearless Fact-checker” and an “Analytical Ace.” If so, he’s well equipped to put those skills to use and find some authoritative corroboration or contradictions.
As for “going beyond the ‘single issue,’” NRA already has, many times, and not just on “campaign finance reform.” He’s surely aware that they – quite properly, I might add – supported ACLU in challenging NSA’s “Patriot Act” telephone metadata collectionpractices? And he must know that NRA produced a series of ads (to the tune of “a seven-figure cable buy”) addressing, among other things, “the IRS scandal, media elitism and security vulnerabilities”?
Wayne LaPierre himself proclaimed Americans “care about their Second Amendment freedoms but understand that all freedoms are connected.” I’m trying to agree with him here, but it seems he and all his apologists are content with those just being words, with no actions to ensure those we entrust with power and prestige live up to them.
Besides, as a former NRA employee, Hutchison must be familiar with Association Bylaws. Right up front, under “Purposes and Objectives,” they state the reason for the group to exist:
To protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially with reference to the inalienable right of the individual American citizen guaranteed by such Constitution to acquire, possess, collect, exhibit, transport, carry, transfer ownership of, and enjoy the right to use arms… [and] To promote public safety, law and order, and the national defense…
The mandate is to protect and defend the whole Constitution. As for that “single issue,” it says “especially,” not “exclusively.” And public safety, law and order and national defenseare all threatened by deliberate and continuous flouting of immigration laws by foreign nationals.
You bet the “amnesty” being foisted on America by vote-pandering Democrats and cheap labor Republicans is an issue with a special threat for gun owners and one intended to “fundamentally transform” the nation. Obama’s Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson proclaimed illegal aliens have “earned the right to be citizens,” and Democrat Rep. Kurt Schrader claimed immigration will decide “who is in charge of this country for the next 20 or 30 years.”
That’s why the White House is running a national campaign to push (voting) citizenship for legal resident foreigners. And it’s why Hillary Clinton is proclaiming “We can’t wait any longer for a path to full, equal citizenship” for the illegal ones.
Grover Norquist is working with Michael Bloomberg and others to help make all that happen. So is every amnesty-supporting politician, which is why giving them an “A” grade and endorsement on gun rights when they’re helping to usher in the day, when the Democrats will have a supermajority and anti-gunners will control the legislatures, is wrong. It does no good if you vote my way today, when 20 years from now it will all be a moot point due to your simultaneous canceling actions.
Gun-grabbers will be able to pass any bill. Sympathetic courts will uphold them and reverse prior precedents (like Heller). That’s what these guys are enabling. Don’t tell me they’re on my side when they’re selling “ourselves and our Posterity” out.
Again, I have no illusions – I fully expect the Norquist recall to fail. I don’t foresee drastic changes to a system that for years has allowed “A” grades for gun-grabbers. Too many (and much louder) voices are in his corner and deliberately indifferent to what he is enabling.
Sure, Mr. Hutchison, go for a foreign language outreach program if you like. Good idea. Let us know when that happens, but by the time you get it off the ground, assuming you ever do, there will be millions more new “citizens.” Plus, you’ve given absolutely no estimates on how many “converts” that will bring in, and if it will be more than a few drops against an overwhelmingly anti-gun tidal wave. One step forward, 10 steps back. You’re demanding more proof for my numbers but presenting no numbers of your own.
Likewise, opining “Perhaps the NRA Board of Directors needs to set up a task force to examine the issue more closely” borders on the ludicrous. When’s that going to “perhaps” happen, who’s going to write the resolution, how many years until we get a finding, and what makes you think it will be any more than a committee rubber stamp for the same management agenda that arrived at the foregone conclusion that members should vote “No” on the Norquist recall? Come on, man…
“If you do not want to see the proof, you will neither look for nor see it,” an observation left under Jeff Knox’s latest (disappointing, I must say) piece by comment poster “ole Shoemaker” notes, summing things up better than I could. “If … you cannot see the proof, a tank running over you will not convince you either.”
I’m left with one last challenge, if only one of the numerous Norquist apologists cares to take a stab at it and come up with something other than anecdotes or platitudes or wishful thinking:
Produce credible data – something that can be independently validated – that “amnesty” and a “pathway to citizenship” for MILLIONS of foreign nationals in this country illegally (and even legally, with current culturally suicidal policies) WILL NOT overwhelmingly favor Democrats and anti-gunners.
They may not believe this, but I pray that they can prove my concerns are unfounded. Give me a valid reason to stop bringing this up. Prove I’m wrong so I can humbly and sincerely apologize for questioning you all.
Or if you can’t, at least admit it.
- VOTE YES on the Recall of Grover Norquist from NRA Board
- Rathner Response Would Be More Respectful if It Didn’t Dismiss Objections to Norquist
- No Upsets Expected in NRA Board Election despite Controversy
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.