““They are coming to take your guns away!’ That was the message from this past weekend’s annual NRA Convention,” Dean Obeidallah [above] writes at dailybeast.com. “In fact, it’s the same message we have heard for years from the NRA. And just as it has been in the past, as it was this weekend, that message is a lie.” Tell that to residents of New York; gun owners forced to sell or transfer their “assault rifles” under the terms of the SAFE Act. OK, the Empire State’s storm troopers didn’t knock on doors and physically remove illegal firearms. Yet. But same diff. Besides, is there any question that gun control proponents want to control Americans’ guns right out of existence? For some, there is . . .
No one in the Obama administration or any Democratic administration has ever tried to take law-abiding citizens guns away. Even when President Bill Clinton signed into law the assault weapons ban in 1994, which expired in 2004, it “grandfathered in weapons and ammo clips produced or purchased before the enactment of the ban.”
There are now nearly 300 million guns in the United States. It would be impossible to take even a fraction of those guns away from people. And more importantly, the government can’t, because the United States Supreme Court in 2008 interpreted the Second Amendment as bestowing a personal constitutional right to own a firearm.
Confused? Don’t be. We know Obeidallah mission: to prove that the NRA’s a bunch of fear-mongering paranoid extremists whose only goal to is to sell more guns for the firearms industry. To do that he needs to appear conciliatory. Reasonable. Realistic. Moderate.
To do that, Obeidallah’s got to thread the needle. An “assault weapons” ban – which remains on the Democratic national platform – isn’t confiscation because, again, there’s no knock on the door. Stopping people from buying certain types of firearms (or forcing them to send them out-of-state) isn’t a gun grab per se. But it’s a gun grab nonetheless.
For starters, the motto for this year’s convention was: “If they can ban one, they can ban them all.” So fear was the very slogan. Then, the NRA’s Executive Vice President and CEO Wayne LaPierre upped the fear factor by telling the attendees: “There’s no telling how far President Obama will go to dismantle our freedoms and reshape America into an America that you and I will not even recognize.” Now even assuming Obama wanted to somehow “dismantle our freedoms,” as LaPierre claims, how could Obama do that in the final 18 months of his presidency when the Republicans control the Senate, the House, and the Supreme Court? . . .
Just the concept of “gun grabbing” makes me laugh. After all, Congress couldn’t even muster the votes needed in 2013 to pass universal background checks for gun purchasers and that had the support of 90 percent of Americans. And that bill failed only a few months after the horrific shooting spree at Sandy Hook Elementary School that left 26 dead, including 20 children.
It’s a pretty bizarre argument: Obama and Clinton and their Democratic ilk aren’t coming for your guns because they know they won’t succeed. No mention of the fact that want to. Or that they have in the past. Nope. The NRA’s a bunch of paranoid fear-mongers because . . . wait for it . . . they’re effective.
The reality is that while LaPierre and his cronies have been weaving fabulous tales of impeding gun grabbing, Republican-controlled state legislatures have been weakening gun safety laws. For example, just last year, Republicans in Georgia passed the “guns everywhere bill” that makes it legal to carry guns in bars, school zones, and parts of airports. And 11 states in recent years even passed laws intended to nullify federal gun safety laws under the guise of “firearm freedom.” (Think “religious liberty” but for guns.)
No mention of that truth by LaPierre. Or worse, no mention of the truth that every day 30 Americans are murdered by gun violence and 53 Americans uses guns to commit suicide.
You would think the NRA would make it a priority to reduce the number of Americans killed by firearms. Instead, it appears that the NRA’s priority is lying.
I guess Obeidallah wasn’t watching when LaPierre acknowledged these victories for firearms freedom (a.k.a., Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms).
The idea that Americans are “murdered by gun violence” – as opposed to murderers – reveals the writer’s clear and present anti-gun bias. Not to mention his failure to mention the hundreds of thousands of Americans who use firearms defensively each day, saving far more lives than those lost.
No small point that. By being pro-gun, the NRA reduces the number of Americans killed by firearms. Strange (for Obeidallah) but true. By protecting gun rights, the NRA also helps protect Americans against government tyranny and, yes, mass murder.
You’d think that a writer enjoying his freedom of speech would make it a top priority to reduce the amount of BS thrown at the NRA. Instead, it appears that Obeidallah priority is lying. [h/t JP]
They’re not coming for our guns (nationally) because we’re too politically powerful (nationally). But they’ve come for guns (and accessories like standard-capacity magazines) in areas where they have more political power. Rhetorically, they routinely attack all gun owners.
They haven’t taken our guns because American’s are too paranoid about the government coming for our guns. How dare we justify our paranoia by speaking out against their repeated failed attempts to take our guns? If only American’s weren’t so paranoid about them taking them away the government could just take away our guns without all this outrage every time they try to take away our guns.
What flags are those in his glasses? I tried googling the colors but there are like 30 bajillion stupid flags with the same colors but in different order. I imagine it is a “glorious peaceful worker paradise” that his family fled from.
“Palestine.” No wonder it didn’t show up in google, its not a real country. Frankly all I need to know about him.
Palestine is the Kwanzaa of countries.
In 1990 they DID that in NYC. When the NRA (different leaders then) sat by and let the GCA68 pass the City Council here went one better> They demanded registration and licensing of LONG GUNS. Then after Stockton Mayor David N. (for numbnutz) Dickhead ordered NYPD to confiscate all “assault weapons”. The City swore on a mountain of bibles in 1968 that the list would “never” be used for confiscation but Dickhead felt he had no need to honor an agreement HE didn’t make. Now Emperor Cuomo is still mulling confiscation from Albany even after 1/3 of the “three men in a room” has been indicted.
Ray
I’m not hearing much about how some of the “bans” do not allow registered firearms to be transferred to another family member when the original owner/registrant dies.
When it comes to confiscation, sometimes a knock on the door right after the funeral is just as effective as kicking the door in while the person is still alive (and a good bit safer for the assigned collector, I’m thinking…).
Nothing makes me more sick than an NRA Basher.
You must not get out much, because, compared to a lot of what’s out there, this guy barely registers a 3 on the stupid scale…and it’s logarithmic.
I also hate it when the NRA is accused of being in the manufacturers pockets. That statement might even be true but who gives a rats a** because if they can’t sell them, we can’t buy them.
Obeidallah is an attorney-turrned-stand-up-comic, most know for his participation in the “Axis of Evil Comedy Tour”
He’s a disingenuous, duplicitous douche.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Obeidallah
“He’s a disingenuous, duplicitous douche.”
Now that… I like that…
Consider it stolen… 🙂
Alliteration is a game we all can play.
Yours was delightfully meaner than ‘Neanderthal Nattering Nitwit’ or ‘Puerile Pablum Puking Putz’…
The neo-liberals typically get their news from comedians, so this isn’t surprising. All my left-leaning acquaintances were crying in their PBRs when Jon Stewart announced his retirement from the Daily Show. They feared having to get their news for themselves.
Yes on a national basis this will not and can not happen. We the people of the gun are way to numerous. However on a state by state county by county level it CAN happen. Again though, I believe they are more then 25 states that will not do that. The east and west costs yes, but the middle of the country no it will not happen. Just my 2 cents worth.
This columns is from someone who shares a viewpoint politically with Democrats that proclaim every election cycle that conservative republicans are coming to take legal abortion away.
…they can spare me the self righteous hypocrisy talk.
I’m not sure why they don’t understand that concept you spoke of. Their holier then though and self entitled more enlightenment they “possess” and yet that very question beseeches them. I love asking that question, it has ended more debates for me then anything else. Seems they just don’t have an answer for that.
Imagine the outrage if California stipulated a non-existent technology requirement for all future new automobile purchases in the state. Or perhaps an anti-drowning device on every new pool.
Yes, they ARE coming for our guns, but not the ones we already own (yet). They are blocking the purchase of new safer technology that does exist because of a mandate for a technology that does NOT exist.
Only in the mind of a pipe-dreaming liberal (or hope-filled socialist/communist) does this make sense. Would you vote for either?
You know there are many places in the US where it’s mandatory to have your pool fenced in, in order to stop children from accidentally falling in, right? And with cars, certain safety technologies are mandated (though they do tend to exist before being required) for any newly manufactured vehicle that you want to actually use in public. I’m not saying that this is the way to go with guns, but you may want to pick your analogies a bit more carefully next time.
Because of you, Obeidallah, I feel better knowing that the G isn’t coming for my guns. Thank you, Gunga Dean, for setting the record straight. We all bask in your reflected glory.
Oh, and BTW, you’re a lying pr1ck.
I saw the sad poor CT souls that stood in long lines to register their weapons. I also realized, even for CT, they were the minority as most lawful owners of the “evil” guns gave a silent middle finger with massive non-compliance. Also, Washington State, Oregon, of course NY, MD, NJ, CO, MA, CA, all increased tyrannical, draconian, downright Australian/European style new laws that only punish or infringe on the law abiding. Would this assclown like that to be implemented in all 57 states? (Per Obama)? And than some more?
Yup.
And he can have a hearty invitation to lead the charge as an embedded “journalist” if they do come door to door. He’ll get a noteworthy story for sure.
I’m not religious, but when somebody puts religious liberty in scare quotes, that tells me all I need to know about them. Dean-O and his progressive fellow travelers are the sort that would prune a sycamore down into a contorted little bonsai and believe they’ve turned it into the best possible version of itself.
Now the UBC has 90% support?? I thought it was 80%.
Wasn’t that poll taken at a Democrat fund raiser?
The poll was taken at a Hollywood party. 90% of the polled wanted universal background checks. 100% wanted more cocaine.
Tell that to the folks in Cook county.il that banned their “assault rifles”…or the poor people in California having their guns confiscated over spending a week in a mental-health facility 40years ago. Or anyone in Chicago,NY. Mass.,Maryland.California,etc.,etc…or wrecking the economy in Colorado “for the children”…
Or the guy in California who moved there from out of state and then they changed the banned list to include a previously legal rifle.
Clubs I’d rather not join: The Gaza Strip Club.
You might change you mind if you could see under her Burka…
Who cares if the NRA is fear mongering? Last I checked, membership to the NRA and attendance at their conventions was voluntary, and they somehow manage to have millions of members and thousands of attendees.
If you don’t like their message, don’t join or attend. Too simple?
Tell that the Californians who lost their SKSs to “Gun Ban Dan” Lungren…
Just because the chef put the frog in a pot of water and put the pot on the stove, doesn’t mean he is trying to boil the frog. No frogs have been boiled! Relax!
Chef: “Hey Mr. Frog what you doin’ in that pot?”
Frog: “The back stroke.”
Chef: “yeah…Lemme know how that turns out for you.”
The frog croaked.
Saw that last night.
I really liked this line:
“No one in the Obama administration or any Democratic administration has ever tried to take law-abiding citizens guns away.”
Oh, really? Try telling that to to Diane Feinstein.
In 1995 she said (on video, no less…):
“If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an out right ban, picking up every one of them….Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in. I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here,” Feinstein said.
The administration wouldn’t do the actual confiscating anyway — they’d have someone else do it for them.
Yes, they are coming for our guns, at least in Kalifornia. The “assault weapons” ban here bans the future transfer of any registered “assault weapon” within the state. This is essentially a slow motion confiscation plan, much like the frog in the heating pot of water. Since these guns cannot be transferred, including being inherited, they are forfeit upon the death of the owner (or must be sold out of state), thus allowing the slow confiscation of all “assault weapons”. CA knows who has them, and will know when you die, and since it happens one dead person at a time, too small and slow to cause an uproar.
The effect is the same though, round about 2040, when everyone old enough to own an “assault weapon” in 1991 is dead, there will be no such weapons legally owned in CA. Don’t expect this excellent (from the banning point of view) plan to not be copied in other anti-gun states.
They haven’t grabbed any guns because every time they try some gun control bull, we all push back hard. If they win one victory, they will push for more, as New York’s “SAFE Act” shows. And if this nation didn’t have gangs, those murder numbers would be much lower.
Dean O.
Hates guns
Likes men (probably)
Reposted from my comment on their site, just in case:
More agitprop from a clueless liberal.
The comments from my pro-2A friends cover the nitty-gritty, but the essence is – they aren’t coming to take our guns, except when they express the desire to do so. The anti-2A movement prides itself on incrementalism. They know fully-well that a wholesale confiscation on the order of what the Australian government did to it’s subjects (which didn’t even net close to 100% compliance) would entail a whole litany of civil rights violations that would make even a Millenial shudder. So, it’s bit-by-bit. Restrictions here, restrictions there, until a gun becomes a fancy paperweight. Couple that with the conditioning aspect the antis employ on the youth, and a restrictive society (not just guns, but restrictions on speech, food, behavior, etc…) will be the sad reality a hundred years from now.
Anyone see the irony? The civilian disarmament complex who uses solely emotion for all its arguments is blaming the NRA for using emotions.
So if the government wants to outlaw the further publication of various books, that’s okay because the government troops aren’t coming into my home to forcibly take away existing copies that I have.
Another sexist, racist, anti-rights, anti-Humanist, sub-Human troll added to The List.
I laugh when they trot out that old, tired line. I really do. Right in their faces. Then, I point out all the people who do, and watch them stumble and stammer and run away.
Fmr. President William J. Clinton does.
“And we should — then every community in the country could then start doing major weapon sweeps and then destroying the weapons, not selling them.”
“When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans …And so a lot of people say there’s too much personal freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it. That’s what we did in the announcement I made last weekend on the public housing projects, about how we’re going to have weapon sweeps and more things like that to try to make people safer in their communities.” – MTV’s “Enough is Enough!”, 22 March, 1994
“We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…” – USA Today, 11 March, 1993, pg. 2A
“If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government’s ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.” – 12 August, 1993
“You know the one thing that’s wrong with this country? Everyone gets a chance to have their fair say.” – From his speech in Philadelphia PA City Hall Courtyard, 28 May, 1993
“There is no reason for anyone in this country – anyone except a police officer or military person – to buy, to own, to have, to use a handgun. The only way to control handgun use in this country is to prohibit the guns.” – While signing The Brady Bill, 1993
“The purpose of government is to rein in the rights of the people.” – MTV, 1993
“I feel very strongly about it [the Brady Bill]. I think – I also associate myself with the other remarks of the Attorney General. I think it’s the beginning. It’s not the end of the process by any means.” – 11 August, 1993
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D – CA) does.
“Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe.” – Associated Press, 18 November, 1993.
“If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them; “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,” I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here.” – 60 Minutes on CBS, 5 February, 1995.
“The National Guard fulfills the militia mentioned in the Second amendment. Citizens no longer need to protect the states or themselves.”
Senator Frank Launtenberg (D – NJ) did.
“We have other legislation that all of you are aware that I have been so active on, with my colleagues here, and that is to shut down the gun shows.”
He died in 2013.
Fmr. Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D – OH) did.
“No, we’re not looking at how to control criminals … we’re talking about banning the AK-47 and semi-automatic guns.” – Constitution Subcommittee, 2 February, 1989
“I don’t care about crime, I just want to get the guns.”
“What good does it do to ban some guns. All guns should be banned.”
He died in 2008.
Fmr. Representative Charles Pashayan (R – CA) does.
“All of this has to be understood as part of a process leading ultimately to a treaty
that will give an international body power over our domestic laws.” – United Nations Small Arms Conference, 2001
Fmr. Senator John Chafee (R – RI) did.
“I shortly will introduce legislation banning the sale, manufacture or possession of handguns (with exceptions for law enforcement and licensed target clubs)… . It is time to act. We cannot go on like this. Ban them!” – Minneapolis Star Tribune pg. 31A, 15 June, 1992
He died in 1999.
Then-Senator (now Vice President) Joe “Buckshot” Biden (D – DE) does.
“Banning guns is an idea whose time has come.” – Associated Press, 11 November, 1993
Representative Jan Schakowski (D – IL) does.
“I believe…..this is my final word……I believe that I’m supporting the Constitution of the United States which does not give the right for any individual to own a handgun….” – Recorded 25 June, 2000 by Matt Beauchamp
“We want everything on the table. This is a moment of opportunity. There’s no question about it…We’re on a roll now, and I think we’ve got to take the–you know, we’re gonna push as hard as we can and as far as we can.” – The Global Dispatch, 12 March, 2013.
http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/illinois-rep-jan-schakowsky-says-assault-rifle-ban-just-the-beginning-moment-of-opportunity-and-seeks-to-ban-handguns-70067/
http://youtu.be/BVz2lHODQvs – Interview by Jason Mattera
Fmr. Representative Major Owens (D – NY) did.
“We have to start with a ban on the manufacturing and import of handguns. From there we register the guns which are currently owned, and follow that with additional bans and acquisitions of handguns and rifles with no sporting purpose.”
“Mr. Speaker, my bill prohibits the importation, exportation, manufacture, sale, purchase, transfer, receipt, possession, or transportation of handguns and handgun ammunition. It establishes a 6-month grace period for the turning in of handguns.” – Congressional Record, 10 November, 1993
He died in 2013.
Representative Bobby Rush (D – IL) does.
“My staff and I right now are working on a comprehensive gun-control bill. We don’t have all the details, but for instance, regulating the sale and purchase of bullets. Ultimately, I would like to see the manufacture and possession of handguns banned except for military and police use. But that’s the endgame. And in the meantime, there are some specific things that we can do with legislation.”
Fmr. Representative Craig Anthony Washington (D – TX) does.
“This is not all we will have in future Congresses, but this is a crack in the door. There are too many handguns in the hands of citizens. The right to keep and bear arms has nothing to do with the Brady Bill.” – Mark-up hearing on The Brady Bill, 10 April, 1991
Fmr. Massachusetts State Governor and State House Representative Michael Dukakis (D) does.
“I do not believe in people owning guns. Guns should be owned only by [the] police and military. I am going to do everything I can to disarm this state.”
Fmr. Representative Henry Waxman (D – CA) does.
“If someone is so fearful that they are going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have weapons at all.”
Fmr. Representative William Lacy Clay, Sr. (D – MO) does.
“The Brady Bill is the minimum step Congress should take…we need much stricter gun control, and eventually should bar the ownership of handguns, except in a few cases.” – St. Louis Dispatch, 6 May, 1991
Senator Charles Ellis Schumer (D – NY) does.
“We’re here to tell the NRA their nightmare is true! … We’re going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless legislative strategy. We’re going to beat guns into submission!” – NBC Nightly News, 30 November, 1993
Representative Shiela Jackson Lee (D – TX) does.
“I would personally just say to those who are listening, maybe you want to turn in your guns.”
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton (D) does.
“I’m personally all for taxing guns to pay for health care coverage.”
Vermont State Senator Mary Ann Carlson (D) does.
“We must be able to arrest people before they commit crimes. By registering guns and knowing who has them we can do that. If they have guns they are pretty likely to commit a crime.”
Colorado State Senator (and Majority Leader) John Morse (D) does.
“People who own guns are essentially a sickness in our souls who must be cleansed.”
New Jersey State Senators Loretta Weinberg, Sandra Cunningham, and Linda Greenstein all do.
“We needed a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate… They don’t care about the bad guys. All they want to do is have their little guns and do whatever they want with them.”
http://www.examiner.com/article/open-mike-reveals-n-j-senators-contempt-for-gun-owners-confiscation-goal
Fmr. California State Senator Leeland Yee (D) does.
“It is extremely important that individuals in the state of California do not own assault weapons. I mean that is just so crystal clear, there is no debate, no discussion.” – CBS San Francisco, 20 May, 2012, before he was arrested and charged with gun-trafficking, taking bribes, money laundering, and official corruption on 24 March, 2014.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/05/20/cbs-5-story-inspires-new-legislation-to-ban-bullet-button/
http://www.sfgate.com/file/757/757-complaint_affidavit_14-70421-nc.pdf
United States Attorney General Eric B. Holder does.
“[We have to have] as part of the gun initiative, though, an informational campaign to really change the hearts and minds of people in Washington, D.C., and in particular our young people. They are saturated with guns in media and entertainment, [and] by the entertainment industry with violence, and I think too many of our young people, in particular our young men are fascinated with violence and in particular with guns. And what we need to do is change the way people think about guns, especially young people, and make it something that’s not cool, that’s not acceptable, that’s not hip, to carry a gun anymore.
In the way we changed out attitudes about cigarettes, y’know, when I was growing up people smoked all the time. I mean, both my parents did. But, over time we changed the way people thought about smoking, and so now why have people who cower outside of buildings and kinda’ smoke in private and don’t want to admit it. And I think that’s what we need to do with guns.
… One thing that I think is clear with young people, and with adults as well, is that we jut have to be repetitive about this. It’s not enough to simply have a catchy ad on a Monday and then only do it every Monday. We need to do this every day of the week, and really just brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.” – C-SPAN2, 1995
Fmr. United States Attorney General Janet “Waco” Reno does.
“Gun registration is not enough.” – On ABC’s “Good Morning America”, 10 December, 1993
“Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal.”
Fmr. Director of the ATF John Magaw does.
“The truth is, [handguns] are used to assassinate people, to kill people, because they are very easily concealed, you can drop them in any pocket.” – When interviewed by ABC’s Day One correspondent John McKenzie.
Boston Police Commissioner William Evans does.
“Having long guns – rifles and shotguns – especially here in the city of Boston, I think we should have, as the local authority, some say in the matter. For the most part, nobody in the city needs a shotgun. Nobody needs a rifle.” – Boston Public Radio, 23 July, 2013
Fmr. Chief of Police for Los Angeles, California Bernard Parks does.
“We would get rid of assault weapons. There would not be an assault weapon in the United States, whether it’s for show or someone having it in a collection.” – Reuters, 9 June, 2000
Fmr. New York City Police Commissioner Patrick V. Murphy did.
“We are at the point in time and terror where nothing short of a strong uniform policy of domestic disarmament will alleviate the danger which is crystal clear and perilously present. Let us take the guns away from the people. Exemptions should be limited to the military, the police, and those licensed for good and sufficient reasons. And I would look forward to the day when it would not be necessary for the policeman to carry a sidearm.” – Testimony before the National Association of Citizen Crime Commissions.
He died in 2011.
Fmr. San Jose Police Chief Joseph McNamara does.
“My experience as a street cop suggests that most merchants should not have guns. But I feel even stronger about the average person having them…most homeowners…simply have no need to own guns.”
East Palo Alto Police Detective Rod Tuason does.
“Sounds like you had someone practicing their 2nd amendment rights last night. Should’ve pulled the AR out and prone them all out! And if one of them makes a furtive movement … 2 weeks off!!!”
He is currently being investigated for ethics violations.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/02/14/gun-rights-advocates-target-california-detective-following-facebook-posts/
Branford, Connecticut Police Officer Joseph Peterson does.
“I [would] give my left nut to bang down your door and come for your gun.” Those are his exact words to a long-time “friend” of his . . .
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/10/officer-reportedly-tells-citizen-i-give-my-left-n-to-bang-down-your-door-and-come-for-your-gun/
Connecticut Superior Court Judge Robert C. Brunetti does.
“No one in this country should have guns. I never return guns.”
http://www.examiner.com/article/connecticut-judge-declares-no-one-should-have-guns
Connecticut Superior Court Judge Edward Mullarkey does, too.
“Those who support the Second Amendment should be ashamed.”
http://ctcarry.com/News/Release/631a41bd-55f3-4b63-9644-c79617bd54d9
New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) does.
“Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.” – New York Times, 21 December, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/21/nyregion/cuomo-says-he-will-outline-gun-measures-next-month.html?_r=0
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel does.
“We’re bending the law as far as we can to ban an entirely new class of guns.”
Fmr. Stockton, CA Mayor Barbara Fass does.
“I think you have to do it a step at a time and I think that is what the NRA is most concerned about. Is that it will happen one very small step at a time so that by the time, um, people have woken up, quote, to what’s happened, it’s gone farther than what they feel the consensus of American citizens would be. But it does have to go one step at a time and the banning of semi-assault military weapons that are military weapons, not household weapons, is the first step.”
Deborah Prothrow-Stith, Office of Government and Community Programs and the Community Violence Prevention Project at the Harvard School of Public Health, does.
“My own view on gun control is simple: I hate guns and I cannot imagine why anybody would want to own one. If I had my way, guns for sport would be registered, and all other guns would be banned.”
Chester M. Pierce, Fmr. Harvard psychiatrist, does.
“Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It’s up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well by creating the international child of the future.” – Speaking as an “expert” in public education, 1973 International Education Seminar
Fmr. Chancellor of Boston University John Silber did.
“I don’t believe anybody has a right to own any kind of a firearm. I believe in order to obtain a permit to own a firearm, that person should undergo an exhaustive criminal background check. In addition, an applicant should give up his right to privacy and submit his medical records for review to see if the person has ever had a problem with alcohol, drugs or mental illness . . . The Constitution doesn’t count!”
He died in 2012.
Sarah Brady, fmr. Chairman of Handgun Control Inc. (now The Brady Campaign) did.
“…I don’t believe gun owners have rights.” – Hearst Newspapers, October 1997
“The House passage of our bill is a victory for this country! Common sense wins out. I’m just so thrilled and excited. The sale of guns must stop. Halfway measures are not enough.” – 1 July, 1988
“We must get rid of all the guns.” – Speaking on behalf of HCI, with Sheriff Jay Printz (of Printz v. U.S. fame no less!), “The Phil Donahue Show”, September, 1994
“The only reason for guns in civilian hands is for sporting purposes.” – Tampa Tribune, 21 October, 1991
She died in 2015.
James Brady, husband of Sarah Brady, did.
“For target shooting, that’s okay. Get a license and go to the range. For defense of the home, that’s why we have police departments.” – Parade Magazine, 26 June, 1994
He died in 2014.
Nelson T. “Pete” Shields, Sarah Brady’s predecessor at HCI, does.
“Our ultimate goal – total control of handguns in the United States – is going to take time…The first problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns being produced…The second problem is to get handguns registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of handguns and all handgun ammunition –except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors– totally illegal.” – The New Yorker Magazine, 26 July, 1976, pg. 53F
Josh Sugarmann, Executive Director of the Violence Policy Center, does.
“Americans are ready to hate somebody, and it’s going to be the gun industry.” – Newsweek Magazine, 16 May, 1994
“The word ‘hate’ is a very carefully chosen word. There’s got to be a real sense of revulsion and disgust. People are looking for someone to blame, someone who’s the cause of their problems, and it should be the gun industry. These guys are the living embodiment of the slogan, ‘Guns don’t kill people-people kill people’. They’re complete mercenaries.” – The New American Magazine, 13 June, 1994
“A gun-control movement worthy of the name would insist that President Clinton move beyond his proposals for controls … and immediately call on Congress to pass far-reaching industry regulation like the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act … [which] would give the Treasury Department health and safety authority over the gun industry, and any rational regulator with that authority would ban handguns.”
“We need to ratchet down the firepower in civilian hands. We need to get assault weapons off our streets and off the gun store shelves … We should ban handguns.” – “NRA’s “really big problem”: Why it’s dependent on a dwindling fringe”, Salon.com, 13 June, 2014.
http://www.salon.com/2014/06/13/nras_really_big_problem_why_its_dependent_on_a_dwindling_fringe/
Michael K. Beard, Fmr President of The Coalition To Stop Gun Violence, does.
“Our goal is to not allow anybody to buy a handgun. In the meantime, we think there ought to be strict licensing and regulation.” – The Washington Times, 9 December, 1993
Shannon Watts, head of Moms Demand Action, does.
“I’ll be pretty clear on this. @MikeBloomberg and I want guns gone. Period. It doesn’t matter what it takes.” – From Twitter, 10 June, 2014
“Banning assault weapons. If you ban the assault weapons listed in the (Sen. Dianne) Feinstein bill, you would still have 2,000 firearms to choose from.”
Time Magazine does.
“As you probably know by now, Time’s editors, in the April 13 issue, took a strong position in support of an outright ban on handguns for private use.” – Letter to the NRA, 24 April, 1981
The New York Times does.
“The only way to discourage the gun culture is to remove the guns from the hands and shoulders of people who are not in the law enforcement business.” – Unsigned editorial, 24 September, 1975
The Washington Post does.
“The sale, manufacture, and possession of handguns ought to be banned…We do not believe the 2nd Amendment guarantees an individual the right to keep them.” – “Legal Guns Kill Too”, 5 November, 1999
The Star-Ledger Editorial Board does.
“So do all the voluntary gun buybacks you want. But until they are mandatory, and our society can see past its hysteria over “gun confiscation,” don’t expect it to make much difference.” – “What N.J. really needs is mandatory gun buybacks: Editorial”, 19 September, 2014
Michael Gartner, Fmr. President of NBC News, does.
“There is no reason for anyone in this country, for anyone except a police officer or a military person, to buy, to own, to have, to use, a handgun. The only way to control handgun use in this country is to prohibit the guns. And the only way to do that is to change the Constitution.” – USA Today, “Glut of Guns: What Can We Do About Them?”, 16 January, 1992
Charles Krauthammer, a nationally syndicated columnist, does.
“In fact, the assault weapons ban will have no significant effect either on the crime rate or on personal security. Nonetheless, it is a good idea . . . . Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation.” – From “Disarm the Citizenry. But Not Yet.”, The Washington Post, 5 April, 1996
“I have no problem in principle with gun control. Congress enacted (and I supported) an assault weapons ban in 1994. The problem was: It didn’t work. (So concluded a University of Pennsylvania study commissioned by the Justice Department.) The reason is simple. Unless you are prepared to confiscate all existing firearms, disarm the citizenry and repeal the Second Amendment, it’s almost impossible to craft a law that will be effective.” – From “The root of mass-murder.”, The Washington Post, 20 December, 2012
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-the-roots-of-mass-murder/2012/12/20/e4d99594-4ae3-11e2-b709-667035ff9029_story.html
Molly Ivan, another nationally syndicated columnist, does.
“Ban the damn things. Ban them all. You want protection? Get a dog.” – 19 July, 1994
Gerald Ensely, of the Tallahassee Democrat, does.
“How is it that the supposed greatest nation on earth refuses to stop the unholy availability of guns? I’m not talking about gun control. I’m not talking about waiting periods and background checks. I’m talking about flat-out banning the possession of handguns and assault rifles by individual citizens. I’m talking about repealing or amending the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Gun freaks say if you take away their guns only outlaws will have guns. That’s a chance worth taking. Because if we ban guns, eventually the tide will turn. It might take 10 years or 20 years. Hell, it might take 50 years. But if we make it illegal to own a handgun, eventually there will be no handguns.
Those of us who think widespread handgun ownership is insane need to keep speaking up. We need to teach our children handguns are wrong. We need to support any measure that limits their availability — and work to repeal the Second Amendment. We need to keep marching forward until someday this nation becomes civilized enough to ban guns. One of the frequent refrains of gun freaks about President Obama is “He’s coming for our guns.” Obama never said such a thing. But I will:
We’re coming for your guns. And someday, we’ll take them.” — In “Stop the insanity: Ban guns”, 23 Bovember, 2014
http://www.tallahassee.com/story/opinion/columnists/ensley/2014/11/22/stop-insanity-ban-guns/19426029/
“Professor” Dean Morris, Director of the Law Enforcement Assistance Association does.
“I am one who believes that as a first step, the United States should move expeditiously to disarm the civilian population, other than police and security officers, of all handguns, pistols, and revolvers…No one should have the right to anonymous ownership or use of a gun.”
J. Elliot Corbett, Secretary of the National Council for Responsible Firearms Policy, does.
“We are now supporting the President’s bill which provides stringent restrictions on rifles and shotguns. We shall also get behind the bill which provides for national registration and licensing. I personally believe handguns should be outlawed.” – 17 June, 1968
“Handguns should be outlawed. Our organization will probably take this stand in time but we are not anxious to rouse the opposition before we get the other legislation passed.” – Interviewed for the Washington Evening Star, 19 September, 1969
Rosie O’Donnell does.
“I think there should be a law — and I know this is extreme — that no one can have a gun in the U.S. If you have a gun, you go to jail. Only the police should have guns.” – Ottawa Sun, 29 April, 1999
“I don’t care if you want to hunt, I don’t care if you think it’s your right. I say, sorry, you are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison.” – The Rosie O’Donnell Show, 19 April, 1999.
The American Civil “Liberties” Union does.
“We urge passage of federal legislation … to prohibit … the private ownership and possession of handguns.” – National ACLU Policy #47, adopted by its Board of Directors in Semptember, 1976
The United Nations does.
“Tighten controls on the gun trade in the United States and other member nations.” – UN Disarmament Commission
Poughkeepsie, NY Mayor John Tkayik (R) knows the truth.
“I’m no longer a member of MAIG. Why? It did not take long to realize that MAIG’s agenda was much more than ridding felons of illegal guns; that under the guise of helping mayors facing a crime and drug epidemic, MAIG intended to promote confiscation of guns from law-abiding citizens.”
He is currently running for New York State Senator, 41st District.
Sioux City, MO Mayor Bob Scott knows the truth, too.
“I was never an active member. They’re not just against illegal guns, they’re against all guns.”
So does Madeira Beach, FL Mayor Patricia Shontz.
“I am withdrawing because I believe the MAIG is attempting to erode all gun ownership, not just illegal guns. Additionally, I have learned that the MAIG may be working on issues which conflict with legal gun ownership. It appears the MAIG has misrepresented itself to the Mayors of America and its citizens. This is gun control, not crime prevention.”
Nashua, NH Mayor Donnalee Lozeau knows.
“I simply cannot be part of an organization that chooses this course of action instead of cooperatively working with those that have proven over a lifetime of work their true intentions.”
Edgewood, KY Mayor John D. Link found out.
“Sometime ago, I attended a meeting with many city officials from throughout the United States. At this meeting there was a table with the title “Mayors Against Illegal Guns.” Not wanting illegal guns, I signed the form not knowing what kind of spin would ensue. As it turned out, I was against the 2nd amendment, etc. I have since been removed from the “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” movement. On our city website I have a letter to all stating my position. I’m not against the NRA, guns, or hunting, and never will be.”
Oldmans Township, NJ Mayor Harry Moore knows better now.
“It is simply unconscionable that this coalition, under your [Michael Bloomberg’s] leadership, would call for a repeal of the Shelby/Tiahrt amendment that helps to safeguard criminal investigations and the lives of law enforcement officers, witnesses, and others by restricting access to firearms trace data solely to law enforcement. How anyone, least of all a public official, could be willing to sacrifice such a law enforcement lifeline in order to gain an edge in suing an industry they have political differences with is repugnant to me. The fact that your campaign against this protective language consisted of overheated rhetoric, deception, and falsehoods is disturbing.”
I could go on literally for days and days, listing pages upon pages of people saying exactly how and why they’re coming for our guns. Not a single bit of it could ever be supported, defended, or refuted by them, either.
Yeah, yeah. “Nobody’s coming for your guns!” Until they are. As always, keep your powder dry and your head on a swivel.
So, how many of those 30 Americans “murdered by gun violence every day” are involved in gang or other criminal activity? Is it 28 or 29?
I would surmise that of the 24 people being killed every day with (not “by”) guns, it’s probably at least 18 if not more.
According to the FBI’s National Gang Threat Assessment, anywhere from 48 – 90% of all violence in all jurisdictions in the United States is perpetrated by gang members.
http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/2011-national-gang-threat-assessment
So, like, this guy was *at* the Convention?
Is that, like, really so hard to believe?
It IS hard to believe actually…. his article has the usual drivel about the eeeeevvvvviiiilllll enareay and even evil-er gun lobby and not a single shred of independent thought.
The author doesn’t seem to like the NRA very much. The article, to me at least, reads like someone who saw some twitter posts about the Convention and then ‘wrote’ an article bashing the NRA. Even if he was on the company dime I have to wonder if he did anything more than pick up his pass so he could expense everything.
Why aren’t they………… because of the monitoring of groups like the NRA etc. What we have seen are measures at the state level to accomplish this. Obama broached the topic but it was a non starter. As a result we now have gun shops being denied bank accounts/credit thanks to the DOJ ( now THERE’S a criminal enterprise). We cannot wait until the barrel is about to go over the cliff. These un-Constitutional schemes must be nipped in the bud.
No anti-gun advocate can, or ever will, agree to the proven fact that guns in the hands of Citizens reduce crime.
Pascal hits a great point in observing the irony of anti-gun advocates criticizing the NRA for using “emotional arguments” to protect our natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear Arms, when that is precisely the tactic the anti-gun crowd uses consistently to argue for more infringements on the Second Amendment (along with exaggerated statistic twisting and out right lies).
The simple fact remains that all Federal, State and Local “gun control” laws are technically UnConstitutional, and the Supreme Court has ruled the Second Amendment protects a “Natural Right” to keep and bear Arms for the purpose of self-protection. (Does that place self-defense in preeminence over Hunting, Fowling, Target Shooting, Militia, Defense against Government Tyranny, or any other use?)
The NRA continues to use the “They’re coming for our guns!” theme because it is effective and because we can clearly see that State and Local Laws are being configured to wring guns out of the population and/or make the purchase of new guns evermore daunting and difficult.
Maybe the more articulate, detail-oriented, fact based discourse here on TTAG has spoiled me for the NRA’s more basic “Gun Grab Threat!” tactic precisely because I understand an out-and-out “gun grab” is neither legally or practicably possible. I do find myself wishing the NRA would take a cue from TTAG and use similar approaches in their endless begs for money. The countless letters I receive from the NRA, NRA-ILA and NRA-PVF employing the “Gun Grab Threat” just fade into meaningless “Wah…Wah…Wah” after so many years.
Dean Obeidallah is a closet gun grabber deluding himself that he’s “too cool for school” in his anti-gun, anti-NRA sentiments subtly laced article. He’s only half-clever, but then that’s all he has to be to get published on dailybeast.com. Good overall analysis, RF.
Dean Obeidallah is such a successful stand-up comedian that he’s been plying his trade on…CNN and The Daily Beast. Truly the dream of any young boy who used to stay up late watching Carson, Leno or Letterman…
Maybe someone should inform this loony that the NRA does not lie or put out false information. The NRA has a legal staff that insures information is factual and timely.
Oh sure, I’m supposed to trust his “opinion” about them not wanting to take away our guns. Without the NRA, they most certainly would be a lot further down the road in making ownership of firearms more difficult, constitutional right or not. Nothing in politics is cut and dried. Just because you have a majority on a certain vote, doesn’t mean it came about by everyone agreeing on every aspect. Do you realize there are plenty of dems hanging on in their states and they cannot afford a solid anti-gun agenda? It doesn’t mean they wouldn’t love to practice one. There are plenty of quotes from liberal leaders that let their subtle agenda out of the bag and they will never be satisfied with one round of more gun control. They will ALWAYS try to chip away at the 2nd amendment. What they can’t do now, does not mean they won’t be able to in the future. Otherwise they wouldn’t waste their breath after every mass shooting. (when was the last time any liberal politician gave an example of someone defending themselves with a firearm?) They have an agenda, and it isn’t going to stop with just a few more laws.
It’s interesting reading an almost year old article and seeing how wrong this liberal lefty is. Obama isn’t coming for your guns. Well since the author made this claim Obama has taken unilateral action on gun control bypassing congress and the courts and his chief of staff has promised more of the same. He has cited Australia as an example to follow. For a time they banned guns and got the predictable increase in crime. The two part assertion that guns are uniquely available in America and we therefore have the most crime is false in both parts. This was politically motivated propaganda from the Soviet Union during the cold war. Yet it has been repeated endlessly by the left for their own gain. They don’t want the people to have the power to resist government. That simple. England is trying to figure out a way to ban knives. Since they banned guns someone is stabbed every four minutes. Oh, the reason for the Soviet propaganda was to cover the fact that, despite total gun control enforced by a police state, their murder rate was at least equal to and at times as much as three times as high as Americas,
Crime rates have fallen every year for the last twenty five years in a row. During this time millions of new guns were added to those already in circulation. More and more people are realizing that the police can’t and won’t protect them. Women in particular are arming themselves. But the obvious flaw in the leftist argument is that gun control has anything to do with crime. Murder and assault are already illegal. Only with gun related crime are guns blamed. With drunk driving we blame the driver not the car. With obesity we blame the person not a fork. Why are guns singled out for this alteration of reality. Because you cannot resist tyranny with a car and a fork.