Anti-Second Amendment Groups Seek Camouflage to Sell Infringments

Hillary Clinton Gun Control
Hillary Clinton – Gun Control

By Dean Weingarten

Dean Weingarten
Dean Weingarten

Arizona -(Ammoland.com)- Those who seek to disarm the public have always had a hidden agenda.  In the middle and early 60’s the assault was more open.  With each new assault the public grew more educated and the fallacies of the anti-Second Amendment arguments were exposed. As public support waned, those who hate an empowered public, have grown more desparate and more disingenuous.

In 1976, Pete Shields was open about his desire for a general confiscation:

  “The first problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second is to get handguns registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition – except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors – totally illegal.”

In the 1970’s, the idea that England and Wales had low crime rates because of gun restrictions seemed plausible.  Then we learned that crime rates had risen as more and more controls were applied.  Each new push for more infringements has been met with data and facts showing the lack of rationality behind the hatred of an armed population.

The latest push is for “Universal Background Checks” (UBCs). UBCs are a precursor to the registration that Pete Shields desired. Any legislation that allows for background checks without recording gun serial numbers and personal data is shot down by those who push UBCs.

Politico reveals the preparation for another round of “rebranding”; changing labels without changing the product. From politico.com:

With that in mind, representatives from a broad mix of progressive groups sat around a table last week at the Washington offices of Global Strategy Group, where they received a tutorial on how — and how not — to talk about guns. Leading the lesson were top officials from Americans for Responsible Solutions PAC, the campaign wing of the group Giffords and Kelly founded after the Sandy Hook massacre.

For example, groups seeking tighter gun laws have been trying to get away from the “gun control” label since well before ARS started testing for a new messaging strategy last year. Better options, they say, are “gun violence prevention” and “preventing gun tragedies.”

“We’ve stepped away from a debate about guns that was sort of postured pro-gun or against-gun,” said Peter Ambler, the PAC’s executive director, “into one that’s centered around data-tested ideas like the background checks that we know increased public safety and save lives, but don’t sort of disapprove of the individual gun owner and don’t disapprove of the responsible use of firearms in society.”

And while Hillary Clinton promised to “keep taking on the NRA” in October, she should maybe stop, according to ARS’ findings, and instead take on the “gun lobby.”

When Peter Ambler is talking about “data-tested” ideas, he is not talking about restrictive gun legislation that has been tested and found to reduce crime. That hasn’t happened. I supect he is talking about polling data and focus groups that are aimed at finding what combinations of words work best to trick people into voting for something they otherwise would not.

These strategies can work in the short term. But people in today’s data savy environment can determine who is lying to them pretty quickly. It doesn’t take long to develop a sense of credibility or a reputation for dishonesty.

The NRA has developed a general reputation for credibility. Wayne LaPierre added much to that credibility when he said that it takes a “good guy with a gun” to stop “a bad guy with a gun”.

The obvious truth of that statement is illustrated with each additional terrorist attack, be it a jihadist with a truck in Nice or one with a rifle in Orlando.

The Anti-Second Amendment plotters are a tiny percentage of the population. They are funded by those with deep pockets. That money can buy a lot of air time, and may sway critical voters in some elections.

Long term education is the key. An educated electorate does not fall for these word games.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten:

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

11 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Marc

“Hillary Clinton: ‘I’m Not Here to Take Away Your Guns'” LOLOLOL.

Rule of Psychology –When lairs speak they’ll often incriminate their very intentions by proclaiming the exact opposite.

Anonymouse

What we need is a law holding elected officials liable for the damages caused by their unconstitutional overreach.

Merlin

Sadly, there is no effective solution without bloodshed. To repeal gun policy, would also correct issues as political Correctness, Social Justice, Tyranny, Ca rear Politics, etc. Soiled by Greed, cleansed by Blood. As bodies mount and blood flows, a Social and Political Equilibrium will result. Don’t take my word for it, Study a couple thousand years of “Civilized” history. When one ignores the past, one is destined to repeat it. Let the cleansing commence.

VonZorch

Lee, the real problem is that most of her supporters do know that she is corrupt and think that’s a benefit.

Lou

Hi Dean, If you read this,…… I read the Ammoland postings just about every day. What I see is a bunch of defining (more or less) the problem. Admittedly, it’s important to define problems so that solutions can be crafted, but the one thing that I almost never read in these Ammoland articles are solutions. I accept the obvious, that all you say in the above article is true, what I don’t see are any suggestions for solving the problem. I challenge you to spending the majority of your time focusing on the Gun Control Issue by devising workable ways… Read more »

David E. Young

Sounds like brainwashing to me. Remember Eric Holder wanting to “brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way”?

Lee

Hillary is a idiot. If any one can’t see how corrupt she is, they really have a problem with their brain. They probably need real mental help.

Wild Bill

@Grim, The forces of ignorance and evil are everywhere, are supplemented with new people every day, and are constantly bombarded with anti-Civil Rights propaganda. And of course, it is up to us to remedy that situation, and that can be fun.

Janek

Government can only hold power over a populace that’s totally dependent on it. The 2nd Amendment is the foundation of ‘self-reliance’. Guns can put food on the table if needed, guns can protect you and your home, and most importantly guns can protect you from any quislings who would oppress you. That’s why it’s part of the Bill of Rights.

hippybiker

I agree with the premise of the article, but who is the educated populase it is talking about? I mostly run into a lot of dumbed down sheep who think the second amendment is about Deer hunting. There in lies the main problem, the lack of understanding, or education.

D. Murphy

If you are a gun owner and also a democrat you need to vote Trump or you will eventually find yourself just a democrat. She is coming for not only the 2nd amendment but the others as well.