Home » Blogs » Question of the Day: What Do Gun Control Advocates Mean by “Common Sense”?

Question of the Day: What Do Gun Control Advocates Mean by “Common Sense”?

Robert Farago - comments No comments

Banning guns in state Senate, House galleries is common sense the headline at seattletimes.com proclaims. Hello Seattle? How is stopping Washingtonians from exercising their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms in their grandiose (not to say bellicose) legislative chambers “common sense”? For that “logic” the Times turns to an “expert” . . .

Christopher Hurst is a retired veteran law enforcement detective and commander of a 15-city homicide/violent crimes task force. He also served seven terms in the state House of Representatives between 1999 and 2017.

Turns out that when it comes to the Constitution, Mr. Hurst is a shifter . . .

The most conservative Supreme Court Justices have affirmed that the Second Amendment is subject to reasonable regulation. And even if it were not, how does the Second Amendment supersede or surpass the Constitutional protection for anyone’s own life, liberty and pursuit of happiness?

Don’t senators and House members have a Constitutional right not to be killed by high-power military assault weapons? Are their rights somehow less than those of the Las Vegas shooter who legally bought and transported his high-powered military assault weapons, with which he shot 546 people?

So “common sense” means making sh*t up and pretending like it’s as plain as the nose on your face. In this case, a police pensioner turned politician fabricated not one but two Constitutional rights: the right to life and the right to mass murder.

Am I right? What does “common sense” on guns mean to the antis? What does it mean to you?

Photo of author

Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the former publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

0 thoughts on “Question of the Day: What Do Gun Control Advocates Mean by “Common Sense”?”

  1. “The Public Pulse: Let locals regulate guns slavery.”

    How is that any different?

    I’d post that on the original article if they allowed comments.

    Reply
    • Common Sense says the earth is flat… I mean, just look at it.

      Common Sense says you can’t stick your fingers in molten lead and suffer no damage — but you can; the Mythbusters demonstrated it.

      Common Sense says a lot of things that are actually dead wrong.

      Reply
  2. …”the Constitutional protection for anyone’s own life, liberty and pursuit of happiness?”

    That’s from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution, jackwipe.

    As for what the most conservative justices believe, that sometimes takes a temporary backseat to a scaled back majority decision palatable to a cobbled-together, five-vote coalition.

    Aa for what constitutes “common sense” to these people, why that would just be anything that moves the ball toward their goal of complete civil disarmament. The proof? Look at anything they call a “compromise.” Their idea of compromise is ALWAYS something worse than the current state; something that lessens our firearm freedom.

    There is never a compromise where we actually gain any ground on any front or they give up something real. It is always a loss for us. Sure, it might be less of a loss than they originally sought, but that’s just them “anchoring” so as to get what they want.

    They set up phony initial conditions, like a new car’s MSRP, then procees to strip you of your rights and send you away thinking you got a good deal. Common sense to them means we give up some real that we already have, while they reduce the size of the infringement they’re demanding this time around.

    Net effect is always in their favor. Next time, they do it all again and get ever closer to their goal of complete disarmament.

    Reply
  3. It means they work from the end they really want and extrapolate backward.

    It means they have no real justification.

    So basically it means the exact opposite of the way they are using it.

    Reply
  4. “What does “common sense” on guns mean to the antis?”
    Any restriction, any criminal penalty, any tax, any fee, any regulation that will suppress the free exercise of second amendment rights is “common sense” to them.
    “What does it mean to you?”
    Full repeal of all local, state and federal gun laws that do not meet strict scrutiny is common sense to me.

    Reply
  5. It’s in the eye of the speaker. The truth is that, generally speaking, grabbers ain’t that smart.

    Devious and manipulative yes. Smart and we’ll educated… not so much.

    Besides, as a former LEO he probably expects a carve out for himself. Cause he’s super well trained and shit.

    Reply
  6. It’s an emotional appeal. So-called “weasel words” to make the speaker seem like they’re reaching out or searching for common ground; at the same time it’s an underhanded attack on the opposing viewpoint’s character/”poisoning the well”.
    It used to be thought that weasels suck the yolks from bird’s eggs, leaving only the empty shell. This belief is the basis of the term ‘weasel words’, used to describe statements that have had the life sucked out of them. The expression refers to words that are added to make a statement sound more legitimate and impressive but which are in fact unsubstantiated and meaningless. Examples of weasel words are ‘people say that…’, ‘studies show that…’, ‘up to 50% or more…’.
    You know, the common bludgeon of leftists in America when discussing anything remotely political, the mainstream media whenever they’re passing off some puff opinion piece as news, etc. Like Farago pointed out, generally it means making shit up and being a smarmy sonuvabitch about it, especially so if the words that follow “common sense” happen to be “gun control”.

    Reply
  7. It has no substantive meaning. At most, it is meant to denote ideas that the speaker favors, which was already understood from their promotion thereof.

    Reply
  8. It is anything they can get that will “progressively” get them closer to their goal of confiscation; hence the name Progressive. They are progressing to their ultimate goal of total control; socialism, communism, marxism or just plane dictatorship.

    They will use any weasel words, lies and ultimately bloodshed to get there.

    Be Prepared !

    Reply
  9. Catch the CNN film “Trophy”(I can’t believe I recommended the clintonnewsnetwork!). Relatively evenhanded overview of trophy hunting. A little preachy but very well made…

    Reply
  10. It’s neat, but I take issue with this line:

    “Due to the bullpup configuration, most of the weight is re-distributed to the rear of the rifle allowing for the possibility of off hand firing,” the company’s website kinda promises. “This is near impossible with most other .50 BMG rifles.”

    Jerry Miculek did it at over 60.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAW3dlTMv6g

    Reply
  11. This would mean having to buy a Remington…,
    So, nope.
    Besides, I just picked up a Winchester varminter in 22-250.
    Mint with scope, dies, brass and projos for $450.

    Reply
  12. How is a bill that purposefully restricts the ability of Nebraskans to restrict the rights of other Nebraskans a good thing? Answer: it places personal freedom above the authority of the collective.

    Reply
  13. Just to clarify the once a month handgun law, was for anyone without a carry permit. If you had a permit only your wife and wallet limited you, in that order. It was aimed at (PUN) to cut down straw purchases.

    Reply
  14. I patrolled Port-au-Prince from Cité Soleil to Pétion-Ville and most the neighborhoods in between. It is mostly a shithole & a cesspool of corrupt Governance. Cité Soleil makes any US slum look like a gated community. I’ve also conducted operations in Mogadishu, Somalia, an African shithole.

    So basically the President was correct.

    Reply
  15. I call him “numbnuts northam”. He long ago surrendered any ethical standing when he decided that murdering babies was a good thing.

    Reply
  16. What does the dollar limit matter on felony larceny? Northam, like McCauliffe, would automatically give them their voting (for D) rights and other civic privileges back as soon as their sentence was done. I guess to them it does matter. The criminal could not vote for them while in jail.

    Reply
  17. There were recent news stories about the manufacturer going under. Not Tactical Imports but I believe Sero. Last 2 weeks or so. I’ve been saving for this gun for some time and was disappointed to read that.

    Reply
  18. from the article…

    As expected, Ives was frequently at odds with the Democratic candidates, and she occasionally drew the scorn of the audience as she repeatedly suggested city and county residents share in the blame for such issues as crime, high taxes and a lack of quality public education because they re-elect Democrats.

    “That is your problem. Your taxes are too high and opportunity’s not here,” she said. “We need jobs and opportunity, and we’re not going to get that if you keep electing these same people as before.”

    the truth hurts.

    Reply
  19. I hope they throw the book at her for this. Poaching for food, i can live with. Poaching for fun or trophy? Wrong. Just flat out wrong. I hope she gets more than just a slap on the wrist. F’ing hate poachers.

    Reply
  20. SAM I AM, Since “Gun Violence Prevention” is simply intended to punish law abiding citizens and would obviously not do anything whatsoever to prevent a single violent crime like we just saw in Las Vegas, what new restriction would you place on law-abiding citizens that violent suicidal criminals will obey and will PREVENT “GUN VIOLENCE” AS YOU CLAIM?

    Reply

Leave a Comment