Republican presidential candidate, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush speaks at a campaign event Saturday, June 27, 2015, in Henderson, Nev. (AP Photo/John Locher)

The AP headline – Bush: New gun limits not way to prevent shooting tragedies – signaled a boilerplate “pro-gun pol says don’t blame the guns” story: And so it seemed, at first. “New gun control measures are not the way to prevent mass killings such as the shooting deaths of nine people in a South Carolina church, Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush said Saturday. Bush, who plans to meet with black ministers in Charleston, South Carolina, on Monday, said identifying potentially violent people before they commit such crimes is a better approach than further restrictions on gun ownership. ‘We as a society better figure out how we identify these folks long before they feel compelled to take up a gun and kill innocent people,’ the former Florida governor said at a town hall meeting.” And then, this . . .

Afterward, he told reporters gun control was an issue that should be sorted out at the state level.

“Rural areas are very different than big, teeming urban areas,” he said.

Wrong answer. Americans natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms is NOT a state rights’ issue, any more than freedom of speech is a state rights’ issue. But don’t take my word for it. While I don’t consider the Supreme Court the final arbiter of my rights, the McDonald decision incorporated the Second Amendment. The Supremes ruled that it trumps local and state law.

This isn’t merely a technical question. Bush is deploying the exact same argument used by the enemies of firearms freedom: big cities need gun control! We’ve got gang bangers!. And crime! And police facing armed criminals! You can’t equate rural Wyoming with the Bronx! Gun laws should be whatever local or state governments need them to be!

I’m astounded by Bush’s statement. Then again the NRA A+-rated former Florida Governor is running as a centrist, prone to making statements like this [via a highly skeptical cnn.com]:

“Florida is a pro-gun state. Gun violence has dropped. There’s a reason for it,” he told reporters after the event. “We created a balance that’s focused on lowering gun violence but protecting the Second Amendment, and it’s a model for many other countries and many other states because of that.”

Be that as it may, Bush’s now-clarified position on gun control – that gun rights should be left to the democratic process at the local and state level – betrays any pretension of “balance.” Or commitment to firearms freedom. His statement kills the hopes of millions of disarmed Americans subject to unconstitutional gun laws, looking for licensing liberation from a conservative President. Which Jeb Bush would not be.

Recommended For You

82 Responses to Jeb Bush Supports Gun Control

  1. I’m not voting for Bush, regardless, but this sounds like a case of words and actions not matching up. I.e. Mouthing the PC position just to get votes. Actually, that is the level of integrity that explains why I won’t vote for him.

    • hes a lier n liberal in red…. never has been or will be a conservative! only in name not actions. he goes where the flow takes him.

    • The south and southwest will not vote for Bush. If he’s the Republican candidate, I plan to stay home because effectively there will be no difference between him and whoever it is the Democrats run. No difference at all. I am not fooled by his pandering sorta-pro-gun-but-not-really statements. The only person this guy is kidding is himself. After seeing the valor of their ancestors debased by the disgracing of the Army of Northern Virginia’s battle flag, southerners are now paying very close attention to our political class. The fallout from that shameful event will have very negative consequences for statist republicans.

      • “… I plan to stay home because”

        And that is exactly what ‘they’ are counting on.

        I think the saying was ‘silence is compliance.’ Not voting is the same as supporting the opposition because you feel strongly enough about it to voice your opinion but not strongly enough to do something about it, like vote against them.

        • Correct. And if Garrison Hall considers other Republican primary candidates acceptable but not Jeb Bush, he would likely find another candidate on the ballot preferable to the Democratic candidate in the general election. Like the Libertarian Party candidate, or other third-party candidates. Add to their political strength and influence, be part of an active voting demographic more prominent politicians will attempt to woo. Help make politicians eager to get a piece of the millions of votes going to third-party candidates by appealing to their voters. Voting Libertarian (or Green Party, etc.) is a vote for their platform and gives them greater influence.

        • Trump is as qualified to be president as McCain–not at all. He is nothing but a loud mouthed bully, and we can very well do without that. He thinks of himself as embodying the American pioneer spirit, but I think its that squirrel on his head that leads him to that belief. And I also think that Rump knows there is no way in hell that he will be nominated to run against Clinton–this is just his lobbying for a place at the table when policy issues are decided.

        • The fact that anyone would consider Trump a “good choice” for anything other than a punchline is a scary thought.

        • Mark, I don’t even think Trump is trying to gain a place at the table. He’s just feeding his own attention-hungry ego. The man is a textbook narcissist.

        • He has more real world experience than Obama did. I would not like voting for Trump but he would be better for people of the gun than some of the other candidates. Walker/ Rubio 2016!

        • All I’m hearing is –

          Guy1: Dude!, Shit Sandwhich 2016!

          Guy2: NO WAY! Giant Douche 2016!

      • my though on Trump… yes he has an ego, yes he says whats on his mind…but so what .. we need some one with a set of grapes right now,..America in nothing more that a large business..what politician has CEO qualifications? answer none of them…you know darn sure he is not going to be swayed by the special interests and sure is not going to let 2nd and 3rd world countries have there way as with present administration..we need to get our country back on track because as I see it it is on a slippery slope right now and if the Dem’s get in office for another term..well…all i have to say is god help us all… my 2 cents worth

    • +1 Scott Walker is the front runner I am most impressed with. I’ll take a Governor vs. a one-term senator every time. And if the public sector unions foam at the mouth in hatred for a candidate, that has to be my guy. A+ NRA rating, too, but Walker is a true believer.

    • Born and raised Wisconsin boy.

      Scott Walker is the real deal, has been a straight shooter as governor. Liberals fear and detest him, which is also a good sign.

  2. + 1K “Wrong answer.”
    Illegal aliens only come here out of Love, to do the jobs that others won’t do. Like take your guns.

    “Poop to That” – Marvin Boggs

      • Sure, the names/legacies illustrate it perfectly, but moreover the leading candidates are always soft-fascists.

      • The crazy part: it is the same Clinton (well the wife anyway) as it was in 1992. At least the Bush candidate is the next generation.

        • Same gen as the 2000/2004 bush, though.

          Who didn’t do such a great job.

          Enough with the political genealogical power dynasties that are in it for the wrong reasons.

  3. Is anyone surprised? I’d have to hold my nose to vote for bush3-anything but hildebeast.(Well no christie or bernie). BTW this is a nearly identical statement to neophyte politician Ben Carson’s opinion. “Big cities are different than rural areas”…

    • I’m not sure why, but so many uber-educated elites, be they R’s or D’s, think that gun-control is the enlightened position. Carson is great in so many ways, but I am a single-issue voter and Carson is WRONG on my single issue.

      • It’s a confusion of guns and violence. They consider themselves “above violence” and therefore see no need for “tools of violence.” Even if they recognize and acknowledge that possessing the tools is not the same as possessing the impulse to commit violence, they still do not see any good justification for owning weapons because they, themselves, would never wish to use one against another human being.

        Up to that point I can hardly fault their line of thinking. I’m all for pacifism. In my day to day life I never see violence. I don’t truly expect to ever need my guns to defend myself–I consider the likelihood on par with getting struck by lightning or being involved in a head-on collision: just north of zero.

        Where my thinking diverges from the intellectual / pacifist line of thought is twofold. First, I recognize that absent the intent to do harm, firearms are hardly dangerous. Follow a few simple rules to mitigate the risk of accidentally shooting yourself or someone else and shooting is a thoroughly enjoyable and harmless activity.

        Second, I recognize that not every person on this planet agrees with my desire to not shoot anyone. Furthermore, the capacity of those people to do great harm is inversely related to the readiness of good people to stop them. Every time I hear someone talk about how inconceivable the idea of taking up arms against the government seems I point out what a good thing that is–the more preposterous and unnecessary that idea seems the more the 2nd Amendment is doing its job. Contrary to what they would assert, it’s exactly the right reason not to erode, alter or abandon the 2nd. It may feel archaic and unnecessary, its removal would imperil future generations. If they really want to “think about the children” they would do well to ponder that.

  4. He is a big-gov R. he would push a gun control bill if thought he could A: get away with it once elected and/or B: it would do ANYTHING for his polls/election possibilities

    Most R’s are big-gov Rs, at least at the national level. Local politics are a different ball game. In Illinois the D’s and R’s from the burbs and rural counties led the concealed carry push, while the D’s in charge of chicago and R’s in the elite burbs were the ones fighting it…

    At the local level it comes down to urban population centers and elites with money vs regular suburbs and more rural counties. You can almost erase the D/R after their name when it comes to guns. National politicians… not so much.

  5. Politicians say what is necessary to placate any given audience. In other words they lie for votes.

    Bush doesn’t stand a chance against several of the other candidates!

  6. The guy is a politician, he’s going to say one thing to one crowd, and the opposite to the other crowd. They all do this. They are all liars. Great system!

  7. “I’m astounded by Bush’s statement. ”

    I’m not. I don’t knew him well, but I do know that he is a strong supporter of unlawful entry to the country and that his father and brother are domestic enemies of the Constitution.

    His father even enacted a gun ban by Royal Decree as soon as he attained office.
    And don’t get me started on Brother George’s Orwellian TSA, HSA, and DHS.

  8. This Independent Constitutional Consevative will happily vote for Walker, Cruz, Paul, or possibly Trump. Christie and Bush are out.

    • The only thing that I like about Trump is that he’s got enough money to finance his own campaign without taking outside money, ostensibly making him a man that can’t be bought. Other than that he’s nearly a complete buffoon and he’s very vain.

      Jeb is a very squishy and malleable RINO, and he’s a Bush. His ideas on immigration are nothing but trouble for this country. He’ll sell us out on guns as sure as the sun rises in the east.

      The only candidates that I’m giving serious consideration to at this time are Walker, Cruz, Perry and Rubio. Paul isn’t enough of a Jacksonian for my taste. I like Fiorina because she’s smart with a great CV and she’s a fighter, but I don’t think she’s going to make the cut. I like Carson a lot on the personal level but he’s nowhere near ready for prime time and I think that he might be teachable on the gun issue. He’d make an outstanding surgeon general or perhaps Secretary of HHS. Other than that, the rest of the ever expanding field of Republican candidates is basically comprised of side show long shots fluffing their egos as near as I can tell. We’re up to something like 29 or 30 officially declared and another half dozen or so getting ready to toss their hats in the ring; truly an embarrassment of riches. But it nonetheless makes for good and interesting political theater.

      The one thing that I am doing right now to stir the pot and foment chaos is I’m sending a little bit of money Bernie’s way. Not because I like his pinko philosophy or that he’s got a reasonably good record on guns but because I desperately want HRC to lose. I think that the longer he’s able to stay in the race and keep HRC’s feet to the fire, the more votes he’s going to siphon off from her and the more he’s going to show the world what a vacant monster she truly is. If you’ve got a loose sawbuck or two that you can throw his way you’ll accomplish several tactical victories; 1. You’ll make his campaign look more like a grassroots groundswell which will in turn 2. freak HRC’s minions and the MSM right the hell out (always an amusing thing) and will 3. force the HRC campaign to expend evermore resources in areas and directions that they would rather not that will in turn 4. mean fewer resources that they will have available to direct at Republican candidates. That sounds like a win/win to me.

    • I’m not sure how far Trump will go in this thing, but we cannot underestimate the poison that is New York City elitism. There is nothing Trump could say that would convince me he does not think guns should be out of the peasants hands. NYC = anti-gun. Period.

  9. Wasn’t there a movie about arresting people for crimes they would commit in the future. Yeah, that’s what we need. Don’t want to get started on jeb bush.

    • Eh, not quite. First of all, it wasn’t Bush’s bank. The bank was controlled by Fritz Thyssen, a German. Originally a German nationalist and later a Nazi, Thyssen broke with the party over WW2, of which he vocally disapproved. He was stripped of party membership by Hermann Goering personally and his businesses were taken over by the Nazi government in 1939.

      In 1940 — two years before the Bank was shut down by the US government — Thyssen sneaked out of Germany to escape the Nazis. Thyssen and his wife were both arrested in Vichy France, extradited to Germany and confined to concentration camps.

      Bush had no involvement with any pro-Nazi activities. But it makes a great story for conspiracy nutjobs.

      • That may be so, but there is no denying that at least three generations of Busheys are/have been deeply financially and otherwise involved with Arab oil families. (See both of the George’s stats prior to running for public office). They are very cozy with governments and cultures, for their own family financial gain, who reasonably wish to see America harmed. I really think they sent our boys to war at this point, twice, for no other purpose but to protect Arab oil interests.

  10. Not a suprise the with the bush clan antigun as his relatives the establishment candidates have an agenda to push and keep the status quo.

  11. Cities are no different than rural areas relative to firearms. I’ve seen drive-by shootings on rural roads, same gang activity as in a city. There is a premise the more dense population somehow changes the application of law and Rights.

    • No criticism of you, but your statement shows you don’t quite see the behind-the-scenes stuff. Candidates can actually raise MORE money before they announce than after. Walker, if he is going to actually run (I hope I hope I hope), is holding off on announcing officially so that he can raise as much as possible before the date.

      • You’re neglecting the other half of the election finance game.

        Once in, stay in to collect the eventual matching federal funds.

  12. I will not vote for anyone from the Great Dynastic Houses, regardless of their politics.

    Remember, Rome under Augustus still thought it was a republic…

  13. I don’t think so. I think RF is just looking to stirr up an easy pickins anti Bush hornets nest. He didn’t say he supported gun control. What he did essentialy say is f**k the blue states on the matter. Which is still the wrong answer, the 2A should apply coast to coast. But it’s a far cry from supporting gun control. There are plenty of legitimate things to hate him for though, like his support of common core and amnesty. And thankfully, there are FAR better GOP candidates this time. I honestly don’t think team Bush will make the playoffs.

    • There are a lot of 2A-types who basically write off Californians and New Jersey-ites because they live behind enemy lines. If, indeed, Jeb believes as you suggest he might (that blue states need to fend for themselves) then he cannot be our American president. We need someone who will strongly give voice to the fact that our rights are endowed by God, pre-existent to the Constitution. The Connecticut man maintains the same rights as the Wyoming man. And I want a president who will articulate that equality.

  14. If you understand that Bush is first, foremost, last and always a politician, then you will understand that NO politician can be trusted with our rights – especially if he/she thinks it will win them some votes.

    What the stupid fucks fail to understand is that for every vote this mealy mouthed position will win them, it may well lose them ten in the process.

    So be it, the wheat from the chaff.

  15. Ah yes. Jeb the Republican, otherwise known as the RINO.

    If he actually gets down to the runoff as a viable candidate as president, just another confirmation that the elites really are the ones running things and why the paper trail voting machines were replaced with the recordless electronic tyrant makers.

    Remember, you can feel better for acting like you voted.

  16. Bush was never high on my list, he has now fallen off entirely. Look at the Senators, if they voted for any of the fast track bills, they voted in support of surrendering both our natural rights and our national sovereignty. My own US Senator here in Georgia sold his vote for about $100K of corporate contributions for his 2016 re-election bid. We can not individually match what the corporations spend to buy US Senators, but in aggregate we can do enough in the primaries to take them out.

    Never trust politicians. Ever. This is why we need the NRA and GOA, they are generally doing a good job of watching the politicians all the time.

  17. Bush and Christie are one in the same. As a registered republican if either gets the nomination, I will stay home on election day.

  18. I’m old enough to clearly remember when Ronald Reagan ran for the Republican nomination. The media trashed him, as they do with all true conservatives and capitalists … said he was too stupid to ever lead. But Reagan had party crossover power … Americans liked him and trusted he would stand up for America more than the Democrat.

    The upcoming election is going to be a choice between whether or not America is going to continue its decline into global socialism/communism, or not. If, by good fortune we don’t elect another Democrat our society has a long uphill climb to retire the failed economic crony capitalism system currently well entrenched, and try to return to a normal capitalist economic system not as corrupted as we have. A big job, and only possible if a new Republican president isn’t paid off.

    Whichever Republican presidential candidate runs against whatever socialist/marxist/communist the Democrats select, it is imperative the Republican wins. Personally I love Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Scott Walker, in that order. However, I don’t believe any of those three can pull votes away from the Democrat (the dumbed down voters).

    Only Trump can pull votes due to overwhelming recognition as a tough and rich businessman who is too rich to be bought off with bribes (like the current Republican leaders of the House and Senate and Roberts of the SCOTUS). Trump has crossover power, gaining votes from working Democrats, Independents, mainstream Republicans and Conservatives (at least this conservative, me).

    If and when the time comes, get behind Trump. He may be the only chance we have. If the Democrats win another, stick a fork in America because we’re done.

    • Trump is on the record for a Clinton style “assault weapons ban.” Google it. Do your homework. Trump running as 3rd party ensures Hillary the win. We need Ted Cruz or Scott Walker, not a flip flopping con man.

      • Trump: “I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun.”

        Not sure how supporting waiting periods and a ban on certain guns because they look scary squares with “I generally oppose gun control”, but then I’m not a deep thinker like Trump.

      • Third party? I believe Trump is running for the Republican nomination. You’re absolutely right about third parties splitting the vote.

        As much as I love Cruz, Paul and Walker, none of them will be able to beat the democrats and their control of the media. This next election is about communism versus capitalism.

        At this point (and things can change) I can’t see another Republican candidate with more voter crossover power than Trump. I think he can pull significant votes from the stupid democrats (& independents) who work for a living but still think the dems stick up for their best interests. They know something’s wrong with America but are too stupid to figure out it’s due to the way they’ve been voting their entire life. Trump the outspoken anti-foreign worker/criminal TV star billionaire could be their protest vote! Big time.

        We do not have enough clear-thinking Constitutional conservatives (and Libertarians) alive to make much of a difference against the commies. Dole, McCain, Romney and the rest of the RNC choices lost, and the only thing that’s changed is there are a lot more democrats voting this next time around as the faithful Republicans die off.

        One more democrat president and we can lower the box and fill in the dirt on America’s coffin that was closed and nailed shut following the commie-in-chief’s last election win. Single issue voters (including 2A) who stay home on election day because no candidate meets their “perfect” mind-sharing status only guarantee the loss of any remaining freedoms quicker than they’re being taken away already….

    • “A big job, and only possible if a new Republican president isn’t paid off.”

      So, in other words, impossible.

  19. Ben Carson made the same idiotic statement, that rural hicks are OK with guns but cities should ban them. This is why a candidate like Jeb Bush is so dangerous, he virtually ensures Hillary the win, and then you can really start to worry……….

  20. In rural areas, you’re not likely to ever face someone who wants to do you harm, so you can go ahead and have guns. Urban areas contain more violent criminals, so you (a peaceful, law-abiding person) shouldn’t have guns.

    Sure. Makes sense to me.

  21. Very interesting information!Perfect just what I was searching for! “You have to be deviant if you’re going to do anything new.” by David Lee.

  22. Very good website you have here but I was wondering if you knew of any forums that cover the same topics discussed in this article?
    I’d really love to be a part of community where I can get suggestions from other experienced individuals
    that share the same interest. If you have any recommendations, please let me know.

    Many thanks!

Leave a Reply

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