Wait. Don’t We Already Have Gun Control?

NRA Board member Ted Nugent was uncharacteristically subdued last night on CNN’s Piers Morgan Tonight. [Click here to watch.] Coherent, too. When Morgan pointed out that America already has 50 gun control laws, Ted asked “What makes you think the 51st law will stop this kind of slaughter?” Good point. [NB: the actual number of federal firearms laws is closer to 300.] By the same token, when you see a banner that says “March on Washington for Gun Control” (as above) it’s important to remember we already have gun control. The antis are clamoring for more gun control. Civilian disarmament. But that’s not a politically palatable concept—at least on the federal level. To wit: the President’s worthless assurances yesterday that his pet gun control measures are 2A-friendly. Leading sfgate.com to proclaim Obama pushes for some gun control. Again, we already have “some” gun control. What we need is “less.” I wish Ted had promoted that concept. Someone should.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

18 Responses to Wait. Don’t We Already Have Gun Control?

  1. avatarDrVino says:

    Some amusing signs being displayed by those marchers….

  2. avatarAharon says:

    Help. Can you guys please suggest sites for me to post an ad that I have a dozen new Magpuls for sale? I’m familiar with ArmsList.com, and anti-gun Craigslist keeps removing my postings. Thanks.

  3. avatarRalph says:

    What we need is “less.” I wish Ted had promoted that concept. Someone should.

    Timing is everything. Right now we are facing cultural genocide. In the climate of fear and hatred promoted by the left, rolling back laws is unlikely if not impossible. What we really need are “guerilla” actions in the courts and in state legislatures that are favorably disposed toward freedom. A full frontal assault on gun control laws just won’t get the job done.

    Mao Tse-tung was a psychopath, but he knew the way to win. “The enemy advances, we retreat; the enemy camps, we harass; the enemy tires, we attack; the enemy retreats, we pursue.”

  4. avatarSixpack70 says:

    Being a potential victim is cool to those people. They don’t see guns as a form of protection. I think these same people would try to ban martial arts after gun and knives. I can hear it now. Why would anyone need to learn BJJ, Krav magra and Sambo? It is only meant for war and should not be allowed!

    • avatarAharon says:

      True. To many people from different groups and going beyond gun issues, being victim is cool as it often provides the “poor-me” victim (real or not) with lots of attention, special societal support, and opportunities to make money. In New Zealand, police chiefs have complained about the laws that allow a woman who files a rape allegation to settle with her accused attacker for $10-15K. They refer to them as serial false rape accusers. One woman was profiled after settling eight times with different men. She made a lot of money.

      Those same people will seek to ban self-defense training and use. In England, some of the nanny-police state supporters are already calling for the banning or requirement to lock-up kitchen knives since 25% of arrested juveniles are found with a kitchen knife on them.

  5. avatarSoccerchainsaw says:

    We already have TOO MUCH gun control. That’s the message that needs to be repeated over and over.

  6. avatarLance says:

    Got to love Ted when he tell the truth to idiots like Piers.

  7. avatarJMS says:

    “this is what a democracy looks like”

    Um…. the U.S. is not a democracy, and the Bill of Rights is not subject to the Democratic process. They are not permissions that the government has chosen to allow us. They are naturally endowed, inalienable rights that no majority can strip from a minority via a vote. That is the whole point of codifying them in a Bill of Rights. They protect minorities from tyrannical majorities.

    We must understand that some amount of harm may come from our Rights and freedoms. That is not ideal, but it is okay. Freedom is not free, but it is significantly better than the alternatives and it is worth its price.

  8. avatarHay Yawl says:

    Chicago style .. deception for power ..
    The government winks / tolerates / encourages (fast & furious) the distribution of firearms for the criminals to use. Once a ‘suitable’ level of chaos to foster a feeling of media promoted insecurity, the American people think voluntarily disarming themselves of the ‘object of derision’ instead of addressing of the root causes, result in attempting to pass laws against firearms and not address the root cause.

  9. avatarMichael B. says:

    Targeting the tools doesn’t change the evil nature of the criminal. All it does is disarm the good and force them to become criminals if they want to protect themselves. The good, who relied on the law before, then lose respect for it. Anarchy might follow.

    But this was never about crime control. The ineffectiveness of gun control is evidence enough of that. It’s about people control. It’s about total control.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.