Remember that scene in Independence Day where the President of the United States asks an invading alien what he wants from humankind? “Die,” the alien responds. So much for negotiation then. As for left-leaning pols talking about “common sense gun control” and the [current] President of the United States’ call or a “conversation” about gun violence, L. Neil Smith [above] isn’t buying it. For a second. In fact, the once and future TTAG contributor reckons gun control advocates advocating for “reasonable restrictions” are exterminating aliens in human suits. Not literally. But close enough . . .
In order to satisfy [the progressive environmentalists’] crackpot theories, and assuage their deeply seated hatred of their own kind (which stems from a pathological hatred of themselves), creatures like this want you dead.
They’ve cooked up a pretty intimidating excuse. They proclaim that the human race has exceeded the planet’s “carrying capacity”, a phrase which means absolutely anything. It’s pretty hard to argue with a phrase that doesn’t mean anything.
Therefore, “some of the Earth’s population has to go.”
“Go where?” Wherever millions of Jews and Gypsies went when Adolf Hitler decided they were a problem that required a Final Solution. Wherever a third of the Cambodian people went when Pol Pot marched them to death.
Writing for the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO), Neil’s essay Is civil argument possible with a gun-grabber? makes the link between statism and mass murder and the preventative role of civilian gun ownership.
Naturally, a hundred million gun-toting North Americans or more, in the United States, represent an obstacle to their plans. You can’t very well kill people who are prepared to “rise up quickly and kill” you and your minions first. Therefore, they must all be disarmed, the chosen means being an “international small arms treaty” cooked up by the UN and being pushed on Americans by Hillary, among others, in the name of preventing war (when it’s actually rebellion against tyranny that they wish to prevent.)
Seizing your means of self-defense is an important first step toward their objective. To answer my own question, civil argument is not possible with a gun-grabber. They aren’t prepared to quibble about it. They may pretend otherwise, they may play at democracy or the rule of law, but plain and simple, they want you dead.
Again, so much for negotiation. If the gun grabbers want us dead why would we sit around a table working on a compromise re: our Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms? But do they? In their heart of hearts, do gun control advocates want bitter gun-clinging American gun owners to just . . . disappear?
[h/t JJ Swiontek]