Did you get that? That’s Nancy Benac of the AP via WaPo, opining on gun laws in the next administration. “When Romney was governor of Massachusetts he projected a more moderate stance and favored tough gun laws…but during the campaign he’s pretty much sent the message that enforcement of existing laws is all that groups like the national rifle association, pouring money into this, and raising expectations that if Obama is reelected he might be more active in a second term.” Remember, the moderate, middle-of-the-road stance is always tougher, more restrictive gun laws. That’s the media’s default position and anything to the contrary is decidedly extreme and outside the mainstream. But you knew that.

12 Responses to Remember, More Gun Control Always Represents the ‘Moderate’ Position

  1. Yes, to the grabbers compromise means we give up our rights and they give nothing in return. The pendulem is swinging lightly in our favor, so now is not the time to compromise.

    • Damn, jwm beat me to it. Compromise to the grabbers is us giving up our guns and them giving nothing in return.

  2. Benac admitted the truth: There is no support for gun control in the public. People don’t vote for it. With regard to public opinion, gun control is the extreme position.

  3. One of the things that peole need to be reminded of more vociferously is that we don’t need “tough” gun laws–we already HAVE tough gun laws. People don’t seem to get it, but it is the constant refrain of “tough on crime” politicians: we’ll pass tougher laws! The laws ARE tough and the penalties for misuse of a firearm are substantial, running from simple misdemeanors (with loss of gun rights) to major felonies and in some states the death penalty. You can’t get any tougher than life without possibility or death.

  4. If our current gun laws aren’t “tough enough,” then what is?

    I suppose a complete ban on guns– Diane Feinstein’s wet dream of “Mr. and Mrs. American turn them all in” — might satisfy the weak-minded amen chorus that supports the gun-grabbing fascists, but maybe not. Perhaps only a total ban on guns, self-defense and hunting would actually satisfy those dimwits and their masters.

    • And once they get that total ban on guns and crime skyrockets, then what comes next? Knife laws, restricting what can be bought, used, etc. And when that doesn’t work to stop crime, outlaw knives. Then move on to clubs, rinse & repeat. All the while the real solution is to enforce the laws, put convicted criminals away for their entire sentence.

  5. I believe the reporter has a clue, the back door to gun control is through the SCOTUS because judges do not follow the law anymore, the are unelected officials who make public policy laws. I have no faith in the SCOTUS their branch is simply stuffed with people to support the agenda of the party in the White House. Its almost a joke that they put on a public face of being neutral when they are simply a hammer for which ever party put them there.

    • I agree. There are a number of back door 2A threats, and don’t forget about a UN Arms Treaty. It might not be legal, and it might not make sense – but people do illegal and nonsensical things all the time (and often whilst driving).

  6. You guys watching the debate?

    Somebody asked a gun control question using the dreaded “assault weapons” catch-phrase. Pshhht.

  7. A Young Pioneer marks Mayday in America game nfl jerseys cheap http://www.jranner.de/ jerseys 2012 Tampa, FL AAMP of America an industry leader in the mobile audio and electronics industry and parent company of seven top selling brands today officially game nfl jerseys cheap http://www.jranner.de/ starts at a reasonable price of $21,000.Ford fusion is a hot customer favorite owing to its high fuel efficiency and negligible engine problem. Ford comes in the list

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *