courtesy-brietbart-com

“Gun control was a central tenet of Hillary Clinton’s unsuccessful campaign for president,” the Washington Post’s editorial board opines, “but it would be wrong to interpret the results of the November 8 elections as a slam dunk for those opposed to sensible gun laws.” Wait. What? Did the fact that the states that “turned” for Donald Trump are a pro-gun rights electorate escape their attention? Apparently so.

Three states approved ballot initiatives for strengthened gun-control measures despite stiff opposition from the national gun lobby. In statehouse races across the country, gun-control advocates had some success in helping to oust longtime gun-safety opponents. There should be no illusions about the difficulty that lies ahead in sustaining and furthering reform, but it is encouraging to see these signs of an increasingly robust grass-roots movement.

Speaking of fake news, where in the world did The Post get the idea that the success of Universal Background Check (UBC) initiatives in California, Nevada and Washington reflects a “grass-roots movement”? All three initiatives were heavily, near-as-dammit exclusively funded, organized and promoted by anti-ballistic billionaire bully boy Michael Bloomberg and his well-heeled pals. Who sunk tens of millions of dollars into the efforts.

You want grass roots? firearms coalition.org reports that “As soon as the ground-game for I-594 in Washington was completed, many of the [Bloomberg] paid, “volunteers” from that campaign were transferred to Nevada where some were reported to be paid as much as $5.00 per signature in the initiative petition effort.”

Never mind all that. The ends justify the means. And the end result? The WaPo reckons the 2016 elections were good news for gun grabbers!

Other bright spots: Sen. Patrick Toomey, Pa., showed that Republicans who support gun control can still win reelection while Sen. Kelly Ayotte, N.H., proved that Republicans who oppose gun safety can lose. And in Oregon every elected leader up for election who voted “yes” on the state’s 2015 background-check bill won reelection. Of course, factors other than gun issues played a role in these elections, and the NRA, which spent a record $30 million, had its victories. But even its early and aggressive backing of Donald Trump was offset by the fact that the most aggressively pro-gun-control presidential candidate in history won the popular vote.

You spin me right round baby right round. But then, the WaPo’s delusional take on political support for gun control is a good thing, not a bad thing. It indicates that the Democrats and their media enablers will double-down on “gun reform” — and pay the price for their civilian disarmament agenda. And as they do, they will continue to paint themselves as victims of the evil NRA, and champions of “grass roots gun reform.”

That, of course, is not likely to stop the gun lobby from wanting to cash in on its investment by pushing extreme measures such as repealing the federal gun-free school zone law, establishing national reciprocity for concealed-carry permits, gutting efforts to crack down on illegal gun trafficking and more. Gun laws in the District unfortunately will be particularly vulnerable. So let’s hope that the mettle that gun-control advocates have shown in recent years in stopping NRA-backed bills in statehouses will prove successful in meeting the coming challenges.

Hey! Them’s fighting words! Still, what did you expect?

Recommended For You

81 Responses to Washington Post Declares Victory for Gun Control

  1. I don’t think anyone here expected the leftists to go quietly while real gun safety laws are passed. I expect a metric crap load of pant$hitting and whining each time a new pro gun bill is introduced. Personally, I’m going to sit back, grab some popcorn, and enjoy the show.

    • Question one in Nevada passed by less then 1% of the vote (around 9722 voters, mostly illegals, felons and union fools)…So the very idea they won without cheating is a fucking lie.

      • Beat me to it, Bowman. I was (and still am) furious at the razor thin margin that has allowed a right to be stripped from the whole populace. What ballot initiatives need is some damn reform. 66% required for ANY initiative to pass and 75% for any that can be construed in any way to limit the rights or functions of others. Too much BS crammed down our throats by the tiniest sliver of a ‘majority’. And to make matters worse, leftist clowns run around acting like EVERYONE EVER EVERYWHERE voted for it and wanted it. Sickening.

    • The meltdown shows since November 8th are so worth the wait, personally I hope they go through the New Year. If you really want to listen to hysteria check out Sirius/XM radio “Progressive” channel, those fols have lost their minds!!!

  2. Record amount spent from the Nra, but was almost all on the national level. Didn’t see anything here in Washington state. I think we have been written off like California. That’s why my donations go elsewhere.

    • If you think bigger picture, the national race(s) were more or less must win for gun rights. We were one activist liberal supreme Court justice, who would have been appointed by HRC, from the entire country potentially losing most of our gun rights for the foreseeable future. I do agree though, donate to local gun rights orgs as you personally will see more results out of that money, but don’t demonize your friend because they had to make a tough call.

      • That’s possible, but the population would be so much lower, so that would be good, at least. Maybe 50-100 million lower. And lots of available seats in Congress and state legislatures.

      • So what do WE now DO to chance California back to a gun friendly state? California isn’t just San Fransisco. Oakland and Los Angeles. Maybe it’s time to take an NRA counter strike to Sacramento. And maybe it’s time that We take a lesson from Blomberg and start to organize to help make California a gun friendly place. California isn’t really beyond all hope. But it will take organization and effort to re-educate them. May people of the gun should adopt the motto
        CONVERT A LIBERAL& SAVE THE SECOND.
        Senior Gun Owner 1950

        • There is a secessionist movement in California at the moment, your best bet is to try to convince them to break off the areas away from the cities into a separate state. One that can remain American, while former city states that were part of California complete their transformation into progressive dystopias.

    • The only hope for our Socialist states is in the Supreme Court, which is why the NRA’s focus on the presidential race was a smart strategy. Even if you live in one of those states – No, ESPECIALLY if you live in one of those states, you should be appreciative of what NRA has accomplished.

      • Well, the SCotUS and federal preemption bills like the Hearing Protection Act. We need to make the fight federal so that the gun grabbers don’t throw their weight around locally and change the culture via export. The bottom line is that if we lose at the federal level we lose. We just need to grow the balls necessary to WIN at the federal level and shove the 2nd amendment down the throats of legislators in slave states.

        It’s the same way we abolished slavery. We didn’t fight it state by state lawsuit by lawsuit. We took control of the federal government and nailed the Demokkkrats to a wall.

        • “It’s the same we abolished slavery.”

          Serge is on to something with that.

          Take a look at what SCOTUS justice Alito had to say on the 2A a few days ago:

          “In reference to gun rights, Alito mentioned Justice Stephen Breyer’s dissent in the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the court found an individual right to bear arms for self defense. Breyer’s dissent, in which he argued that the Constitution’s Second Amendment protects militia-related and not self-defense-related gun rights and it does not absolutely bar government action on guns, gave a “roadmap” to those who would seek to undermine the ruling, Alito said.”

          Interesting comment, don’t you think?

          To me, it sounds like he might be open to substantially *strengthening* the 2A, if he knew the votes were there to back him up…

          https://www.yahoo.com/news/alito-outlines-possible-conservative-agenda-u-high-court-185021438.html?soc_src=mail&soc_trk=ma

        • Given that we have substantial cause to impeach and remove RGB over her obvious partisanship, we might be looking at a 6:3 conservative, liberal split fairly soon.

        • RGB?

          I think you may be referring to Bader – Ginsberg.

          I doubt the ‘cuck’-servatives have the spine to impeach her. Ginsberg will just spend more time in the SCOTUS gym and take her vitamins and eat vegan for the next 4 years and wait Trump out, I think…

        • Autocorrect. But in any case, we can always just up the size of the court to 13 seats with a simple act of Congress.

        • “…we can always just up the size of the court to 13 seats…”

          I wonder if Ted Cruz has been whispering that in Trump’s ear when they had a recent chat…

    • Washington State has been written off like California because Washington State has turned into California. Go to Politico and look at their election map. Click on Washington State and look at how the vote turned out county by county.

      When I lived there, all the Democrats were on the wet side of the state. Now the only dots of red in a sea of blue are the Hanford Nuclear plant and a few grizzly bears up in Pend Oreille county. The state looks lost, man.

    • Sorry that the NRA didn’t come to your personal rescue. They got distracted making sure those of us who fought in our own states everyday and donate to multiple national groups, as well as on a local level, didn’t get stuck under a crazy, warmongering, gun grabbing, liberal president.
      I’m sure next time they will consider the fact that Amanofdragons’ $25 a year on an irregular basis is going to be crucial to the fight, and will drop a couple million on your communist leaning srate.

      • Washington state is in a deep hole, but not hopeless. We did get a win to change the language regarding SBRs to bring the law in line with NFA rules; twice..kind of. The first time around we got it passed, until some bureaucrat started mucking about, and then got the re-wording passed despite a hostile hearing panel (waiting on efiled Form 1, any month now…).

  3. I find it comforting that they either cannot or refuse to peek outside of their safe space. This is the sort of pompous obliviousness that left them shaking and crying on election night.

    • They’ll be over the crying soon enough. Then comes the raw *anger*.

      At this point, I’m glad there are no gun related bumper stickers on my vehicle so an enraged Progressive can slash the tires or worse.

      They *will* eventually attack us, and it will be in a typically leftist cowardly manner…

      • If you mean *physically* attack us, I doubt it. But, as always, if you turn out to be correct, I will be ready to shoot them. I suspect the attack will stop.

  4. Remember that guy from the Iraq War, I think his nickname was “Baghdad Bob”? The guy who insisted that the Iraqi army was winning and in control while opposing forces were a quarter mile behind him taking over the airport and city? Yeah, the Washington Post reminds me of that guy.

  5. It just goes to show that enough hasn’t been done to defeat them. The enemy has regrouped and is rested, and the WaPo is near the top of the pyramid, and fighting for anti-gun $$$ as election $$$

    There’s still half a billion POS (D) voters out there that need to be interdicted at every turn.

    • Our countries population is 320 million. The worlds is 7.5 billion. Not sure what that half a billion is in reference too as the US doesn’t even have a half billion.

        • He’s still wrong. I am CERTAIN that I’ve heard they’re only allowed to vote for 20 years after they die. Unless dead Republicans vote Democrat, too. Huh. Anybody know the laws on that?

  6. They should carefully read the final version of Toomey’s UBC bill. It wasn’t what they think it was.

    Hopefully, the new Congress and President will secure our 2nd Amendment rights and protect them from infringing Government (Federal, state, and local) actions through legislation and judicial appointments to the Federal courts.

  7. What the proponents of further gun rights infringements fail to foresee is that if they are successful in enacting their laws the results will be deadly. And by “deadly” I mean in at least three different ways, two of them literal.

      • Actually, I’m for “states rights” when they don’t directly conflict with the CotUS. Gun control is a federal issue by the 2nd amendment incorporated under the due process clause of the 14th. Even if you were to grant that concealed carry is a state’s issue, reciprocity falls under the full faith and credit clause.

        There are very few things that the federal government has the absolute right to dictate to states on. Gun rights are amongst those things.

        • You gave the correct answer. 14th Amendment but as written the Constitution only constrained the Federal Government. States were free to infringe to their hearts content and the fact that they didn’t is evidence that our interpretation of the Second Amendment is correct.

          However, it is uncertain whether the Full Faith and Credit Clause is relevant to concealed carry licenses. Mutual recognition of drivers licenses and, until the recent SCOTUS decision on same sex marriage, even marriages licenses is product of a State action. The States had agreed to recognize each others drivers and marriage licenses and there is no reason they could not withdraw that recognition. All the same sex marriage decision says is that if one state issues marriage licenses then they have to allow same sex marriage. A single state could abolish marriage and recognize no State issued marriage licences since they would be treating everyone the same.

        • Wrong.

          The 2A was incorporated upon the states by Heller, which expressly preserves longstanding state law restrictions on the RKBA. The 14th Amendment is mentioned only in passing.

          As to the Full Faith and Credit Clause, it only requires that each state recognize the laws of other states. That is, if you’re convicted of murder in ine state, you’re still a murderer in the other state. If you’re sued to judgment in one state, you can’t escape it in another state.

          It does NOT mean that a state must substitute its own laws for another state’s laws. A state does not have to honor something that is specifically against its own law. References to marriage licenses are specious. A marriage license in one state has no legal validity in another state. The proof? States require you to get a new license in their state if you want it recognized there, same as with driver licenses. True, licenses are apt to be recognized, as long as they don’t violate the laws of that state, but they are nit required to be.

          Speaking of which, driver licenses are recognized as a courtesy between states, but more so that they can share databases and ensure someone has only one driving record. The purpose of the Driver’s License Compact, which is voluntary, is to keep scofflaws from dodging their old records.

          Ultimately, the proof of the limitations of the FFCC and its applicability to carry licenses is that we’re talking about it. If it were the automatic sledge hammer you assert, this would already be a non-issue.

        • Incorporated under Heller by what means? The 14th Amendement. That is that is only way for the Bill of Rights to be incorporated at State and Local level. Heller was the first case for which it was cited.

        • Heller was a suit against the District Columbia and therefore only addressed the 2A at the federal level.
          McDonald v. Chicago was the decision that incorporated the 2A in the states.

    • Pwrserge, WTF you talking about? What do you think 2A *IS*, if not federal preemption of all firearm laws? Grabbers are of such intellectual superiority that they can safely ignore all laws which they do not agree with. Addl federal “preemption” will have no more effect than 2A does now.

      • How will we know if we don’t try? The bottom line is that the 2nd amendment can be “interpreted”, a federal law directly prohibiting states legislating on the matter cannot.

      • Pwrserge is correct and you are wrong. When written the Second Amendment only applies to the Federal government. It is the 14th Amendment that created Federal pre-emption.

        • “… When written the Second Amendment only applies to the Federal government…”
          How does one interpret that in relation to the First Amendment which quite obviously states “Congress shall make no law…” while the Second states “… shall not be infringed” without stipulation of being limited to government?

          If anything, the First Amendment would not apply to the States and the Second would apply everywhere. Not to mention that at the time the Constitution was ratified and for many years thereafter there were States with state religions.

        • The First Amendment reads “Congress shall pass no law…” Not “Congress and the State Legislatures shall pass no law….” The First Amendment did not apply to individual states either. The last state church in the United States was disestablished in 1833 when Massachusetts ended the Church tax..

        • The 2nd Amendment did not only apply to the Fed when written. Read the Dred Scott decision. It was even brought up in the Palmer vs. DC case.

        • If that were true, please explain why 2A is not simply folded into 1A. The difference is that states were expected to make laws outside 1A, but were not allowed to modify 2A. The fact that enforcement since then has been exactly opposite cannot be blamed on the writers, their intent was quite clear.

    • Can we come up with a new internet rule where anyone who mentions the word “cuck” unironically not only loses the argument but is laughed off the page?

      I swear sometimes I wonder if everyone here is old enough to own a gun.

      • Only we we make up an internet rule that anybody who tries to make an argument on #muhfeels or #muhstatesrights is equally full of shit. Sorry bro, the CotUS trumps any “rights” a state might have.

  8. Yeah! Gun control won! Now there’s no need to spend any more money or push for more anti-gun bills because gun control has won! Yeah!

  9. Hopefully WaPo and the rest of the left-wing media will continue to convince Democrats that a strong gun control platform will be good for them in the future.

    Hildebeast messed up big-time with her open contempt for the Second Amendment. Here’s hoping plenty of her ilk continue to make that same mistake.

  10. Don’t take the gun from their hand or the rope from around their neck.
    Let the anti-gun liberty hating commit political suicide. Good riddance to them.

  11. Well of course gun control won! What did you expect when 97% of the country supports it?

    On hearing this glorious news, Goebbels high-fived Hitler in Hell… which only proves that wherever you are, you can still be wrong.

  12. WaPo just happens to be owned by one of those anti-ballistic billionaire bully boys.

    “Sire, the peasants are revolting!”

    “You said it. They stink on ice.”

  13. Nobody even noticed all three states were liberal no wonder they passed. They should try to pass this bull Sh*t in Texas.

    • How do I notify Bloomberg and Soros that I am available to spread propaganda for only 10 million a year, satisfaction guaranteed or the second year is free!

  14. “longtime gun-safety opponents”

    Wow, pretty honest of them. What I dont understand is how the term gun safety could be negative but, proggies gotta prog.

  15. EVERYONE now knows that the WAPO (and CNN, and the NYT) are nothing more than propaganda outlets for the DNC these days. They sacrificed their last vestige of credibility on the pyre of this last election. Who cares what they think, or report.

    • “Who cares what they think, or report.”

      We had better care.

      If they report lies, it is up to *us* to call them out on it…

      • You can care, if you have the time for it. I have a number of apathetic family members and co-workers who had their eyes opened in this election to just how dishonest and corrupt our media is. If one good thing (besides Trump winning, I mean) came out of this election, it was this.

      • Do we have a responsibility to monitor the National Enquirer? Everybody knows its crap, nobody cares. NYT is the same.

  16. Good for the Washington Post Bezzos tax haven.
    The real world sees it quite another way.
    Dream on the fools. They like the Times.
    If they print it. It must be true right??
    Delusional is a better word for it.

  17. “Gun control was a central tenet of Hillary Clinton’s unsuccessful campaign for president…but it would be wrong to interpret the results of the November 8 elections as a slam dunk for those opposed to sensible gun laws.”

    Right, you either support HRC or you’re not sensible. False dichotomy, much, WaPo?

    Why do I get the sneaking suspicion that some Clinton-aligned mouthpieces ghost-wrote this piece for WaPo? Oh, because I read through Podesta’s emails, that’s why.

    I hope Chris Cuomo doesn’t come arrest me.

  18. What !!! Are the Demo-Erratic news shrills still relevant ! Besides, I though all these DNC/Globalists were all under investigation for violent Satanic occult activity, and Child sex slave trafficking !? Maybe they need to perform some more “Spirit Cooking !”

  19. Well Trump will try to nominate a justice like scalalia. He’ll get his first one confirmed even if they have to “go nuclear. “. GInsberg is 83, I doubt we’ll need to impeach her. God may have other plans for the court. And Trump may get to appoint replacements for Kennedy( age 80) who is conservative but a swing vote and Breyer (78) who is liberal.

    Just replacing ONE plus the open seat liberal will change the courts balance. And it’s likely his appointees would be MORE or 2 a than Kennedy.

    The election of DJT means no natiknal gun control in my lifetime. Likely the same for my Son ( age 3). This is due not only to the balance of the court , but also demographic trends against gun control among millinieals. The boomers are the most anti 2a of any generation and the are NOT getting any younger. .

  20. So, they lost more local laws n regs than they won, their candidate lost, their great media wall is cracking with stories about what really happens leaking through, their localized reg “victories” are getting called out for the Kabuki they are, and their Bloomie-backed astroturf is getting seen for what it is.

    The laws are getting chipped away, they’re losing the argument, and the culture has left them.

    If that’s “winning”, we should encourage the civilian disarmament folks to keep doing it.

Leave a Reply

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