As far back as I can remember it’s always been time for gun control at The New York Times. Except for August 1, 1863 when the owner (and editor) used Gattling guns to defend the paper during the Draft Riots. Today’s pro-gun control editorial reminds President Obama of his vague promises on gun control during the last presidential debate. It trots out the usual half-truths (citing 30k gun deaths without pointing out the percentage of suicides), misdirections (trumpeting an uncredited poll that backs up their call to register all private gun sales) and flat out lies (“State laws allowing students to go armed to class in Colorado, freeing owners in Oklahoma to wear holstered weapons in public, and letting people ‘stand your ground’ in Florida and a score of other states have already damaged public safety immeasurably”). More ominously, the op ed runs Senator Feinstein’s renewed assault weapons ban pledge up the flagpole and salutes it . . .

Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who was a principal in the 1994 enactment of a 10-year ban on civilian use of assault rifles, intends to propose its reinstatement. “Weapons of war do not belong on our streets, in our classrooms, in our schools or in our movie theaters,” she said after the Aurora killings. This bill affords President Obama an opportunity to follow through on his 2008 campaign promise to work to revive the ban.

“This bill” banning assault weapons (whatever those may be) and high-capacity magazines (whatever those may be) has yet to see the light of day. But it’s funny—in a horrible, cynical kind of way—that the same paper that consistently called American gun owners paranoid about attacks on their Second Amendment rights now touts the instrument of that attack.

Of course it’s not paranoia if it’s true. And the Times’ editorial adds credence to the gun rights community’s fears that an Obama unchained will be a gun grabber reborn. That’s not the same as saying that an Assault Weapons Ban is inevitable or even politically desirable. I reckon not. But this canary in the coal mine is coughing. Again. Still.

Meanwhile, the Times editorial reveals the key to the whole process: demonizing the NRA. The paper does a lousy job of it: “Mr. Obama talked about starting ‘a broader conversation’ about reducing gun violence. The best place to start is in Congress, which has been grossly negligent toward constituent safety for the past 20 years as it bows to the demands of the gun lobby.”

Hey, at least the paper’s calling for Congressional action, rather than an Executive Order. More to the point, a comment by Clyde Wynant underneath the post spells it out for readers who’ve heard it all before. Or not.

When these discussions arise, it is always important to remember that the NRA is not a group dedicated to sportsman or hunters, most of whom have no need for assault weapons or handguns, but rather it is an incredibly wealthy lobbying organization, which seeks only to allow its sponsors, the gun makers, to remain profitable. All their talk of the Second Amendment is a smoke screen. They care not about your “rights,” they care only about their money.

With millions of guns on the streets in America, it may be impossible to put the genie “back in the bottle,” but that doesn’t mean it isn’t the right thing to do.

And there you have it: an attempt to parse the NRA, and thus the Second Amendment, to death. The idea that the gun makers’ interests and Americans’ Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms are aligned doesn’t occur to Mr. Wynant (a Thin Man with a thin argument) or, by extension, the Times.

Equally, Wynant’s comment reveals his and, by extension, the paper’s desire to attempt to “put the genie back in the bottle” (i.e., remove all guns from private ownership). They would do well to remember that this “genie” granted Americans the freedoms that they enjoy. Well, if not them, us.

42 Responses to New York Times: Time for Gun Control

  1. Government wide Impeachment Proceedings against Obama, Holder, Fienstien, Bloomberg, Rahm and others should begin immediately because of the simple fact that not only are they violating our constitutional rights they are disobeying and violating the very laws that they themselves have sworn to uphold and protect!!
    Of course that would mean starting over with new members of government but it would give us a better chance at the America we once were.
    Although I don’t always agree with the way the NRA does things if they want to demonize someone why not take out the MSM and MAIG for slander, bias and discrimination!!

  2. “They would do well to remember that this “genie” granted Americans the freedoms that they enjoy.”

    Don’t assume they share and support the values of freedom as you do. Yesterday, the NYT was calling for curtailing the 1st Amendment for corporations that are not the media. Most likely the NYT does not consider TTAG worthy of being defined as media and therefore not deserving of media 1st Amendment rights. Certain ‘academics’ within the Obama administration have called for blogs to be required to post the government’s view alongside any critical written pieces that do not support the official views. I think the NYT advocates for the rights, protections, and special class status for select groups (often requiring bias towards other groups) and much less rights for individuals.

  3. I think gun grabbers dont see BIG bans coming so they just bang there heads on there media pals. I dont care what jerks in New York Times which is one of two BIGGEST anti-gun New papers in the nation (other is the Washington Post). Overall the situation is the same we have a progun congress in the House and a filibuster in the senate to kill any UN ATT or AWB or anything the Brady Campaign wants in this article. We must fight and be vigilant too. Overall tell these liberals to take a flying leap.

    I think Mr Foghorn and Robert Farago agrees, dont you?

    Overall ignore the liberals wish list which come from any liberal being President they can wish that doesn’t mean it will happen.

  4. A birdcage liner that makes more money from subscriptions than from advertising by its own admission, is not a newspaper that is in good health. Let the NYT continue its nonsense. Ignore it, and in time, it might end up like the San Francisco Chronicle, or, better yet, like Newsweek. Any attention that the rag gets from references to it only brings a slight, temporary increase in readership – an excuse for it to try to get a few more dollars out of advertisers, and a temporary extended lifeline.

    In any case, layoffs are due to take place at the NYT any day now. Let’s hope that some of the most extreme anti gunners end up being shown the door when this happens.

  5. The problem is not the NYT. They are just a symptom of a deeper problem in our national culture.

    The “modern” viewpoint is that government has a responsibility to secure the public, provide services and combat human problems like hunger,healthcare and climate change-and furthermore that government MUST solve these issues by any means necessary. That naturally requires compliance of individuals, who are too ignorant to manage their affairs and are certainly too foolish to be allowed to own anything remotely dangerous.

    Rights are not even a part of the discussion, because civil liberties are too threatening to the collective. How can the government secure the public if it has to ask permission first? How can a government ensure everyone feels safe unless everyone is reduced to the lowest common denominator? It cannot without destroying individual liberty, and the progressives understand that.

    In order for America to realize its progressive destiny ( puke), that AR15 over the fireplace has to go. In order for the genie of collectivism to emerge, the lamp of civil disarmament must be rubbed beforehand.

      • I agree with ST. The problem is the indoctrination of the population to liberalism then the tweaking to collectivism. But, an armed population is a bit more difficult to deal with. Once we cross the threshold of 50% of politicians willing to sell us out, gun prohibition will be with us longer than Obama Care. And I fear it is only a matter of time before the brain washing is complete.
        Dragon Software airs a commercial touting it’s product with a boy composing a report(?) and he says “Should we have wars to protect our country?…..delete country, insert freedom” So the sentence reads “Should we have wars to protect our freedom?” Should we fight for our freedom? A question asked only by slaves. But this is the everyday meme being implanted in our youth and adopted by the left and weak minded. The press is the tool of subversion being used as it most certainty has for decades, to undermine the national psyche from liberty to submission. No surprise the article in the national paper of sedition.

  6. So if we believe that the reason for the second amendment is not for hunting but rather to keep our government in check, and the last stop for defeating tyranny, than this is a mute point. Logic would assume that we the people have a right to own and carry anything the US military or other forces do.

  7. NYC itself is merely an aggregate of brand names. NYT will wither on the vine as most print media continues to do. Fifty Shades of Gray (Grey?) and e-readers are all thy props up Barnes & Noble. NYT doesn’t need a punch, it needs a light push.

  8. Oh they will be coming for our firearms. Just give them a little more time. A few Supreme court apointments and off they will go. No matter if the truth is posted most people will ignore it. Less then 2% of crime is even rifle related. But they will ignore that as will the public.

    How many people do you think will actually hold on to their firearms if our government outlaws people from owning them. The AR will just be the beginning. The government wants it all and most people will just hand over their firearms. Alot of people talk smack but the bottom line is they will turn their firearms over.

    • The choice seems to be to get enough people to agree to meet the government mercenaries with force, or hand the guns over. If not enough people agree and band together, then the resisting gun owners will be murdered.

      The root of the problem is the belief that one person can ever legitimately have authority over another. How does one reconcile “All men are created equal…” and “Congress shall have the power to tax…”?

      Apparently some people are more equal than others. And they claim (totally illegitimately) that they have the right to initiate the use of force against the people in society.

      Violence against the people who claim these illegitimate “rights” will not solve anything long term. Real and lasting change can only come from shedding the belief in authority.

  9. Back when I was in the gun-control camp, putting the “genie back in the bottle” seemed like a great idea.

    A year or two ago, it finally hit me: you can’t put it back. The country was founded with firearms usage and ownership being common. It’s been that way for centuries now. What is the current estimate for number of guns in the US? 200 million? Putting aside all Constituional arguments (for a moment, pipe down), I realized that there is no practical way to make them all go bye bye in a country this large. None. Too many, too big a country, too “ornery” a populace (:p), too much history, too much 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure (again, ignoring the 2nd Amendment protections for a moment), too many metal working machine capable of producing functional (if not accurate, reliable, or pretty) firearms. Too. Damn. Much. So I could either wave magic wands around or learn to defend myself and my loved ones. The genie has always been out of the bottle, and there never was a bottle, anyway.

    Also, they’re fun.

  10. There are some 100,000,000 gun owners and 300,000,000+ guns in this country. More join our side, and more guns enter the market every day. The message to the control freaks is clear: We will never allow the gun control that you want. Find a new hobby and grow a new fantasy life.

    • I think our guns will be taken by the UN. Takes the US political machine off the hook. “Hey, there wasn’t anything I could do!” We already accept the unaccountability of our government officials so why stop now? I don’t imagine the general gun owning public would fare well even if it were UN troops should push come to shoot. I think most look at their families, look at the opposition, think of jail and turn ’em in. Not good.

      • If the UN blue helmets come after our guns then it is our duty to stand up and fight for our country!!
        The UN is foreign countries/armies and they would be operating on American Soil!!
        The oath you take upon joining the military says you swear to defend our country from All Enemies Both Foreign and Domestic. The UN Blue Buckets would fall under foreign enemies and Obama would be a Domestic Enemy were he to let the UN onto our soil for the purpose of taking our rightfully owned property of any kind by force or coercion!!
        Just my opinion and my belief!!!

        • Hey, I’m not for surrender but I’m not for suicide either. I’m not going into any fight with the “I’m right behind you” crowd. I want to be with men that are crawling over me to get into the action. Most 2a’ers have never shot anything more aggressive than a watermelon. More have never been shot at. This won’t be tea with the Queen. How long will any, outside of combat veterans, hang out after seeing the head of the guy next to them explode? What about protecting their families? Bravado if great over a beer, but getting bloodied takes quite a bit more balls.

          Ho, and BTW there are already something like 50,000 UN troops already stationed on out soil.

        • Sammy..I agree 1000% and let me clarify. I know guys around here who are excellent shots but at the same time I wouldn’t trust them very far at all under fire. Now the vets I know around here, young and old, I would trust a lot more.
          I have learned from my time in a combat arms MOS that when and if the SHTF we will be out away from any homes and practicing a little guerilla warfare.
          It has been proven throughout history that you can’t beat guerilla warfare with modern tactics, especially with the younger by the book officers in the military now. Even a lot of the combat experienced officers are still by the book.
          The ones to worry about are the unconventional troops!! Hopefully they will come over to our side. That being said I hope and pray it never happens.
          As for the 50,000 UN goons right now they aren’t technically commiting any crimes on our soil, that we know about!!
          Powder Dry. Weapons Clean!! Eyes and Ears Wide Open!!!!

  11. Once Barry has Universal Health Care and 50% on The Dole he will do what ever he likes, just like the UK we’ll all be serfs unless we actually form ranks.

  12. Bah. Little Pinch and his stuffed moose are just talking to his neighbors and flaccid cohorts on the limp-wrist mixed-drink party circuit in Manhattan. They know that nothing is going to be done, and that legislative attempts to increase gun control will result in a mid-term blowout that would make 1994 look tepid by comparison.

    People need to understand that the NY Times is now just a parody of a newspaper. They’re bleeding cash, and without the huge infusions of cash from that shady Mexican crony capitalist, Carlos Slim, they’d be out of business already. They’re shedding staff and assets on their glide path into the terra firma.

    They don’t even know what to do about the clown they just hired from the BBC who covered for pedophiles at the BBC. Reasonably sane people would just tell the BBC twerp to pack his stuff and leave town – but the NY Times people have to actually pretend to think about this.

    Since the BBC is rabidly anti-gun and even more rabidly anti-Israel (with more than a hint of anti-semitism coming off them as well), expect to see the NY Times double down on stupid with their new management.

    • But 300 plus million firearms with 100’s of billions of rounds of ammunition, fired one shot at a time, whenever, and however is chosen to do so, is indeed sufficient to strangle and end the tyranny as such anrachists who would destroy the US and attempt to confiscate, have wives, children, parents, friends, a job to go to, a home, media members responsible for spreading the lie, they all have to eat, they all have to sleep sometime, always looking over their shoulders, never knowing when or where their number comes up.

      War isnt civil, never has been.

Leave a Reply

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