DeSantis Gunhide Question of the Day: Will A House Divided on Gun Rights Stand?

WI State Rep, Bob Gannon (courtesy jsonline.com)

Judging from the state of gun rights in the states, there are two Americas. One where freedom rings and one where freedom is for whom the bell tolls, if you know what I mean. If you don’t, Delaware can now hold up any firearms purchase for 25 days for whatever reason they see fit, while Wisconsin legislator seeks triple damages for businesses that ban guns. Eat Cheese or Die State Rep. (and insurance salesman) Bob Gannon’s bill doesn’t have a hope in hell, but his “make gun banners pay for their lack of security” legislation highlights the difference between states that cherish gun rights and those that wipe their feet on them. Considering the prospect of a Clinton administration and the recent congressional sit-down to restrict civil rights, will the center hold?

desantis blue logo no back 4 small

comments

  1. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

    NOPE…it’s getting to open rebellion. AND I know who has most of the guns…

    1. avatar bob326 says:

      It is not there yet, but sadly, it is getting close. Scary freaking times is an understatement. From a historical perspective, it is inevitable…eventually. If not in our time, it will happen in another. Lets just hope we win this election, because frankly, war sucks even if your cause is right.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        War does suck but tyranny sucks more. Give me Liberty or give me death… and all that jazz.

        Seriously, beyond a certain point a government with the global reach that ours has could be dangerous for all humanity once it is freed from the shackles of the Constitution.

        1. avatar bob326 says:

          Very true. I think that is not lost on other countries either. For example, I am sure Russia hacked the DNC and published Hillary’s game plan for that very reason.

        2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Bob326,

          Oh, now that is an interesting idea.

  2. avatar CRF says:

    My question is this: where and when will it come to a head? Perhaps California. Is that not where we will see whether people are willing to fight for their rights? Just speculation, I want to see why you all think.

    1. avatar Red in CO says:

      No way. The vast majority of Californians would be absolutely thrilled to vote for a full blown, 100% ban on any and all firearms, regardless of caliber, type, ROF, lethality, size, etc.

      Honestly, I could easily see Texas seceding if Hilary gets to the white house and manages to get some massive federal gun laws passed. And if Texas tries that, there will be no shortage of other states that will follow suit.

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        Oh how ironic that would be – the second time in history that Democrats broke away from the Constitutional Union!

        I still contend that those who ignore and are willing to trample upon the Constitution are the traitors who have ALREADY seceded, not the Constitution loving states (and regions) who may be forced to sever ties in order to save the Constitution. It does not matter who occupies the halls of the federal government in Washington D.C., only who is a Constitutionalist.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Perhaps we would be better served if Texas exiled California from the union.

    2. avatar Removed_californian says:

      The problem here is that most of the rkba people are WORKING and have JOBS. They aren’t on entitlement programs, we have businesses and other things that hang in the balance unlike a number of people who support liberal policies and banning of weapons. They can riot and revolt all they want (i.e. BLM) because they have nothing to lose. Believe me, California has people who love the second as much as anyone on this blog, but we still have too much to lose and are vastly outnumbered. Most of us would move were it not for assets that you can’t exactly pick up and move.

      1. California relies a lot on mass transport of water.

        I wonder how vulnerable the water infrastructure is…

        1. avatar Cliff H says:

          I have plotted this as an idea for a novel at one point. California is extremely vulnerable to siege warfare. The major urban centers cannot exist without a constant inflow of water and food, mostly through canals and over Interstate highways.

          The Los Angeles Metro area, for instance, imports nearly 100% of its water by artificial canals and channels, many requiring pumping stations to get over mountains. Their basic necessities enter the L.A. valley via I-5, I-15 and I-40 with a few trickling in from the south via I-10 to I-15 and I-5 north. Each of those major highways has a choke-point at a natural mountain pass.

          Without doing extensive research I can still predict that Los Angeles would devolve into mass chaos within two weeks of cutting any two of those supply routes, one week if the flow of water was also stopped. In any hypothetical civil conflict California is a liability to the opposition. Their only hope would be if the U.S. Navy decides to take the side of the Rebels (anti-constitutionals) and keeps supplies coming into their ports. I postulate that this would be unlikely across the board as every member of the Navy has taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution, not the government in Washington D.C.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Recommend reading “Trainman” by PT Deuterman (retired Navy captian). There are a total of six bridges that cross the Mississippi river. Imagine if they are gone.

    3. avatar california richard says:

      No….. A lot of pro 2A folks leave the state and implore others to leave as well rather than stay and fight. Read the comments on any CA related TTAG artilcle and you’ll see CA gun owners criticized for “staying in that God forsaken state” that “its your own fault for letting it happen” and “dont make excuses for living there. You can leave any time.” …… Ive said it before and I’ll keep saying it; You can run but California will find you and try to take your guns where ever you go. California is about to turn a lot of peacable (but disagreeable) citizens in to felons ecause we wont comply….. We’ll see what happens then.

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        ” You can run but California will find you and try to take your guns where ever you go.”

        Molon Labe!

  3. avatar Shire-man says:

    Just the fact that so many major votes of the past decade or so have been essentially 50/50 should be a sign of a major rift.

    Even the Brexit, which I’m still giddy over, was basically 50/50.

    All I know for sure is that I’ll be in that 50% that is armed and trained. Not the 50% made up of Trigglypuffs.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Be careful, though…that’s near 50/50 of those that vote.

      Presidential general elections run about 50-60 of eligible voters for turn-out. So, if a President gets roughly 50% of the votes, that person has been elected on the “will” of roughly 25% of the population.

      One could argue that the 50% doesn’t care. Or, one could say they are disenfranchised and have given up on “my vote counts.” Or something else.

      But, either way, with 50% of the eligible population NOT expressing a side via a vote, we don’t really know where they stand. Yeah, they could be apathetic or whatever, but the point is, we can’t use the results of elections to gauge their position.

      1. avatar Nanashi says:

        Keep in mind voter roles aren’t updated as much as they should be. There’s plenty of dead people ect. who are still listed as eliigble voters and driving turnout numbers down.

        1. avatar Ing says:

          And the lack of voter ID requirements means that several million noncitizens (both legal and illegal residents) are voting in major elections.

          There’s pretty good statistical support for the contention that illegal voters actually tipped at least 3 swing states to Obama in the last two elections.

          It’s gonna get real ugly here in America…there’s no question about “if,” only about when.

        2. avatar pieslapper says:

          Be assured those people vote, at least anywhere dems oversee the apparatus.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I personally know several unrelated people who are not registered to vote due to a desire to remain off the government radar. Some also eschew jobs which file W-2 forms for the same reason, preferring to subsist on odd jobs paid in cash, without even an exchange of names. I have always considered them a bit nuts, but that opinion is fading.

  4. avatar No Soup 4 You says:

    But …. but ….. but ……. It’s the law ..!?! ….. There are two types of people alright , those who understand this and those who do not. – ” Where RIGHTS secured by the Constitution are involved , there can be NO rulemaking or legislation which would abrogate them.” — Miranda V. Arizona.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      That quoted statement was judicially good for, what, 5min?

      Those who control the political landscape and the courts are all about “rights” when it something that favors criminals, sloths, infanticide illegal aliens, those who believe the government should reduce the entire population to subsistence living, and force 99.98% of the public to endorse and promote the most bizarre of behaviors.

      On the other hand, when a society decides that the murder of the unborn is a virtue, what acts are too intolerable to excuse?

      1. avatar Troy K says:

        You say “murder the unborn” like it’s bad! Not at all! Government control of sex, birth control and abortion (while failing to educate kids with truth) means we need more jails. #WelfareBabiesGoToJail

      2. avatar Cliff H says:

        While I abhor and oppose categorically the murder of innocent unborn children, it may be that the murder of 50 million + babies, the majority of which would have been born into and raised by Progressive mothers, may in the long run work to our advantage. It’s no wonder the Progressives are so invested in importing millions of Undocumented Democrats.

        Roe v Wade makes the Holocaust look like an historical mishap. Estimates vary on the total number of dead, military and civilian, in the Second World War, but the toll from Roe v Wade is approaching the number who died in the European theater.

        Progressives like to go on about the toll from the two bombs dropped on Japan, a total of maybe 200,000 dead. How does that compare to their 5 million?

        1. avatar Cliff H says:

          That should read: How does that compare to their 50 million dead?

        2. avatar ThomasR says:

          Yep. 50 million dead. Liberal/Progressives, a cult of death,

  5. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    Well, the United States has been a 50-50 nation since the end of the Reagan presidency. The danger we face is that we now have a generation of Americans being raised up who don’t even know what it means to be an American, which is why we really do need immigration reform and education reform.

    1. avatar BobS says:

      We’re doing what we can: Project Appleseed in Castro Valley, on a hill with a view of San Francisco across the bay, almost always sells out 50+ slots, every other month. We train the skills and teach the history to keep our precious heritage alive.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        Is that the Chabot Range? I heard they’re closing that down.

        1. avatar BobS says:

          Yes, that’s the current official status. But (1) it’s not over till it’s over, and (2) other nearby ranges are good possibilities too.

      2. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

        That’s great news! Every course we have at my range is also sold out.

  6. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    One thing the ban all guns crowd never gets is that firearms last far longer than they use to. Gone are the days of black powder and corrosive primers and look how many of even those old guns from the War Between the States, and the American Revolution are still around. A modern rifle or pistol kept in a dry environment and cleaned and oiled on occasion will continue to function as normal for a couple of hundred years minimum. Ammunition is not difficult to keep for long periods as well. I have personally fired cartridges that dated from WWI with no issues beyond a slight degradation in accuracy.

    Do these idiots think that even half of all gun owners will meekly turn in their guns? We are in my estimate far less likely to do so than the Australians, and a far larger portion of our citizens own guns. The Aussies got at most 20%, do they think they would do better? Do they have a clue how resistant the population would be to using force?

    1. avatar Pyratemime says:

      The policy people pushing this stuff know exactly how long firearms last and what the danger is to the average person when force becomes their exercised option of force. They view those casualties, on both sides, as acceptable and even desirable. Those casualties don’t matter to those pushing this idea because the people who will be hurt aren’t real in their mind.

      1. avatar OneOfTheGoodGuys says:

        “Live free or die.” And I’m sure you are right; the left would prefer we die. In their minds, the world would be a better place without free thinking, Liberty chasing types. Oh! Did I just get put on the “No fly / No buy” list? Damn it!

  7. avatar CLarson says:

    We are headed for a crack up. It a race to destroy the nation between slow, inevitable insolvency and flareups of malignant leftist cancer that tempt us to cut out the offending parts. Civil disarmament is just one symptom of the disease.

  8. avatar Stateisevil says:

    I believe that the banners will win because they’re not that stupid. They’ll ban NEW guns, California style. The pro gun people will not openly flaunt a new ban. And most pro gun people already admit they think the government is right. We have given in on suppressors, sbr’s, and surrendered all on full autos. IMO, there is very little hope.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      I agree. That’s why I strongly pushed for secession in the late 1980s and throughout the 1990s. Indoctrination through compulsary public school, colleges and universities, mainstream media, and social media, means that individual liberty doesn’t have a chance in this country. I believe that if Liberty falls completely in America, the rest of the world will rapidly follow. In my opinion, the sooner a state or states wise up, the more likely individual liberty will survive. We are losing the long game. The free exercise of individual rights cannot be restored incrementally in this day of modern technology. It’s impossible do so. It plays into the statist hands when we try to convince ourselves otherwise. They have all the time in the world and the natural tendency is towards tyranny. It is what it is.

  9. avatar gs650g says:

    One look at the culture today and it’s anyone’s guess what happens next.

  10. avatar DerryM says:

    Anyone who does not understand that America is deeply, even irreconcilably, divided at this point in time has not been paying sufficient attention. The prospect of a second Civil War is daunting and, I think, infeasible unless a significant number of contiguous States secede from the Union. Other options are not clear at this time, but I think the upcoming November Election and what may happen around it are pivotal. From my point of view, the overthrow of the über Left controlled Democratic Party is imperative to saving and restoring the Constitutional Republic.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      I mostly agree with you with the qualifier that the republican right is no friend of individual liberty either. Many on the right don’t know what it takes to be free or really understand what true freedom is. Short of whole states leaving the Union or refusing to bow down, large areas of people could publicly and steadfastly refuse to bow down. In a massive act of civil disobedience, they could live free in the face of such tyranny. I’m not sure there are enough people living in one place that understand freedom enough to do so at this point. That being the case, I’m not sure there’s enough in one state to secede from the union successfully.

      Regardless, barring something drastic, the basic understanding of inalienable natural rights of the individual is poised to be wiped from the face of the globe. Never before has mankind seen the technology and military might capable of tracking vast numbers of people on a worldwide scale. In less than a generation there will be no escape for those who cherish their Liberty. I believe that this generation or the next might very well be the last to know true freedom.

      1. avatar DerryM says:

        John, I agree with you, as well. I have no illusions about the Republican Party being a friend to embrace for any of us. In fact, I have no love for any Party on the current political scene and I think I’d like to see a new party formed that is Constitution centric. For now, however, the über Left controlled Democratic Party is the number one threat actively working to destroy America and strip us of our rights. It must be stopped.
        I agree with your second paragraph completely. I believe that Liberty is in serious peril. Ironic that the freest form of government ever devised by Humankind may perish due to ignorance and failed understanding.

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      See my post above about The Siege of Los Angeles.

      While it may appear that many States are blue the fact of the matter is that in many if not most cases that illusion comes from the domination of the state by massive Liberal controlled urban centers.

      Washington – Seattle
      Oregon – Portland
      California – San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego (maybe)
      New York – New York City/Albany

      And so on. In every case those urban areas depend entirely on the importation of supplies from their less Liberal, and generally gun-owning, rural areas. They may believe they hold the political power, but even Leviathan must be feed and fueled and supplied with toilet paper.

      Speaking of which, suppose you successfully cut off 80% of the water supply to the L.A. basin. How long would that area last after discovering they could no longer flush their toilets, much less take a shower?

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        Keep in mind that we’re talking about 7 million or so unflushed toilets.

        1. avatar DerryM says:

          In So Cal that would be more like twelve million unflushed toilets. 🙂

      2. avatar DerryM says:

        @Cliff H, I absolutely recognize and agree with your points in both posts. The urban centers are extremely vulnerable to any disruption of essential supplies and services. With millions of people crammed into compact geographical areas I don’t think any level of Government could maintain control. Those not armed and willing to fight for their own survival will be victimized and killed by those who are.

        I have heard reports the Federal Government has “plans” in place to deal with this should a National Emergency and Martial Law be declared, but I doubt the effectiveness of such plans, as well as their existence.

  11. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    Ive known for years what Im willing to do if push comes to shove.
    I for one wont be shoved.
    My biggest concern is I can only carry so much…

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Internet opsec, my friend. The net is not your friend. Stay safe.

  12. avatar Publius says:

    This is exactly why the US was set up for most decisions to be made at the state and local level, that way the various states can have the laws that fit the views of their citizens. Trying to force millions of very different people to follow the same laws only polarizes people into two extreme camps.

  13. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    We are certainly living in interesting times.
    Keep your powder dry my friends.

  14. avatar N says:

    This is what I tell anyone who says that the 2nd amendment was only for muskets.

    https://youtu.be/MfsKibQ480w

    TTAG should write a article and make a video about the Girardoni air rifle. Shooting it, showing its capacity, how fast it can be shot, and how it was made before the 2nd amendment and the bill of rights.

    http://controversialtimes.com/issues/constitutional-rights/this-repeating-20-round-rifle-was-invented-12-years-before-second-amendment-was-ratified/

  15. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    “Will A House Divided on Gun Rights Stand?”

    Perhaps a more pertinent question would be, how long will it take for a country that doesn’t respect the rights of the people to fail?

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Answer: Such a country cannot fall fast enough as it is a menace to free individuals. I just hope ours doesn’t hang around long enough to turn into something globally nasty!

  16. avatar Ralph says:

    A house divided usually gets bulldozed.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      Or sold to settle the community property agreement.

  17. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Considering the prospect of a Clinton administration and the recent congressional sit-down to restrict civil rights, will the center hold?
    There really is no center so for to hold. Looks pretty binary to me.
    I hate to be a negative Nancy, but this is the peace that probably will not last.

  18. avatar Chris Mallory says:

    We should have broke up back in 1861, but the war mongering tyrant Lincoln could not let the tax revenue get away. Now we are 3-4 nations sharing one state. The sooner we split, the better.

  19. avatar ButtHurtz says:

    It will start, for me, the day they come for my guns. If I survive the first encounter, I’m going tyrant hunting.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      ButtHurtz,

      Please define, “… the day they come for my guns …” in precise terms.

      If fedzilla promises to use any and all force necessary (including deadly force) to prevent all future gun sales, does that qualify? After all, they have come for your guns that you were going to purchase in the future. And they have come for your children’s guns that they were going to purchase in the future.

  20. avatar jwm says:

    I keep seeing these split the union up comments and wonder how that would work. I have family in Texas and I hear that Republic of Texas stuff a lot.

    Would it be a vote?

    What would happen to Texas’s share of the US national debt?

    What currency would the ROT use?

    What if Texas held its vote for seccession and 20% vote to stay with the US and 20% vote for ROT and 60% vote to return to Mexico?

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      “What would happen to Texas’s share of the US national debt?”

      The same thing that happened to the Colony’s share of the British debt in 1779.

      “What currency would the ROT use?”

      Not sure, but it would probably be on a gold standard.

      “What if Texas held its vote for secession and 20% vote to stay with the US and 20% vote for ROT and 60% vote to return to Mexico?”

      Let the 60% go back to Mexico. More room for those in Blue states to move to Texas.

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      “What would happen to Texas’s share of the US national debt?”

      Zero. A little place called Washington, DC holds the debt as that is the seat of the United States of America. Smart states should see the writing on the wall and get out while the getting is good.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        And how does this bailing on the national debt effect the new nation/states standing with the worlds financial markets?

        Texas was its own republic before it became a state. And that didn’t work well for them. I realise that was then and this is now.

        I’ve been to Texas and still have family there. Without federal backing it would be exceedingly easy for Texas to once again become Mexico.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          The United States of America can NEVER pay its national debt. There isn’t enough gold to do so and the amount due climbs by the second. The government is now openly breaking free of constitutional constraints. Get out now or get out later… I would take my chances against Mexico. While I respect your POV, it sounds like those on the remain side of Brexit. Freedom is never clean or without great risk. The choice is clearly live free or live in servitude.

        2. avatar jwm says:

          Out of the frying pan and into the fire….comes to mind.

        3. avatar John in Ohio says:

          True but the choice is live free or live under tyranny. That’s what live free or die and give me liberty or give me death is all about. Remaining part of a nation that openly and blatently disregards individual rights is eventual suicide. At least being free offers a chance at really living. Besides, even without this division the national debt was going to destroy America anyway. Our economy was cooked already. The federal government violated the Constitution in all sorts of ways to incur those debts. The take-home message is that when a government takes on more authority than simply protecting the rights of its citizens, eventually it becomes tyrannical. Ours will never be solvent again and will never not be tyrannical. It can’t be undone. Our government is like a rabid dog. It ain’t gettin’ better.

        4. avatar John in Ohio says:

          https://mises.org/blog/first-uk-then-scotland-then-texas

          “While secession of American states is often dismissed as absurd, there are few reasons to believe that a state like Texas — to name just one example —could not immediately transition from state to nation-state. With a large economy, port cities, oil, and easy access to European, Latin American, and even Asian economies by sea, economics arguments against such a separation fall flat. And of course, the success of smaller states like Norway, Denmark, and Switzerland illustrate that bigness is truly unnecessary.”

  21. avatar John in Ohio says:

    Here’s some inspirational music for these interesting times in which we find ourselves living. (Battle of New Orleans)

    https://youtu.be/50_iRIcxsz0

  22. avatar Pg2 says:

    When you have some gun owners openly mocking other individual liberties, and using the same anti-gun rhetoric/propaganda talking points while doing so, the prognosis for the 2A is grim.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      Good point.

      No one wants to admit they are the problem (bring in Pogo: “We have met the enemy and he is us.”), but the anti-gun cause is united, while the pro-gun people delight in trash talking their own, pouring bitter bile on other gun owners and 2A supporters, demonstrating their juvenile ability to engage in the favorite leftist tactic: the shout-down. Pro-gun people are dysfunctional, dissolute, divisive, intent on destroying natural allies, forgetting the most basic characteristic of political warfare: winning. If the pro-gun side cannot present a unified front, a compelling emotional message, energize the majority of voters, nothing else really matters. Losing on “principle” is a loss, no matter how you cut it. There are no honorable defeats in the fight for the future of a nation.

      “Show me a good loser, and I’ll show you a loser”. (Vince Lombardi).

      1. avatar jwm says:

        Time for your alter ego, 2asux, to put in an appearance.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
DeSantis Gunhide Question of the Day: Will A House Divided on Gun Rights Stand? http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/06/robert-farago/desantis-gunhide-question-day-will-house-divided-gun-rights-stand-speak/" title="Email to a friend/colleague">
button to share via email