Massachusetts/United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- Let’s get one thing out of the way: Seth Moulton served in the military during the War on Terror and put his life on the line. As patriotic Americans, we owe him gratitude for that. However, his military service does not mean we should fail to call him out for going after our Second Amendment rights. Moulton has held himself up as part of the “Problem Solvers Caucus,” but sadly, it looks like our Second Amendment rights are something he sees as a “problem” in need of a solution.
Unlike fellow War on Terror vet Tulsi Gabbard, Moulton has been very vocal in his desire to strip law-abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights. In his first campaign for the House, he got endorsed by Michael Bloomberg. He’s also spread the nonsense about how “civilians don’t need weapons designed for war.” Never mind that civilians already cannot acquire the select-fire (capable of firing either a single shot per trigger pull or at full-auto) M4 carbine that is standard-issue for the United States military due to the 1986 Hughes Amendment.
The AR-15 and other modern multi-purpose semi-automatic firearms – the only fire one round per pull of the trigger. While they bear a superficial resemblance to the M4 carbine, M16 rifle, and AK-47, they are not “weapons designed for war.” They are no different from a Remington 597 or Ruger 10/22, semi-automatic rifles owned by many law-abiding citizens.
Moulton is misusing his combat service to give credence to one of the big lies spewed out by anti-Second Amendment extremists, in an effort to punish millions of Americans who never shot up a school, church, mosque, concert, movie theater, or other public venue for the misdeeds of a very tiny minority. Justice Department stats show that you’re more likely to be killed with someone’s bare hands than with a rifle of any type, much less the so-called “weapons of war” Moulton is fear-mongering about.
This deceit alone makes Moulton a non-starter for Second Amendment supporters, but Moulton is worse from there. We have the usual votes for “universal” background checks (never mind that NICS doesn’t have complete records, and in many cases, shooters already passed the checks). That’s not a real surprise. Nor was his vote in opposition to HR 38, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, in the last Congress.
What is stunning is that Moulton also voted against the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act, which addressed the arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights to certain veterans. These veterans had not been declared dangerous to themselves or others, they simply needed help managing their disability benefits. That is potentially a huge mental barrier to seeking help for service-related conditions.
The practical reason should not obscure a principle: The invisible wounds suffered in the course of serving our country should not become a reason to strip law-abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights, barring a court involuntarily committing that person after due process.
Our Second Amendment rights were among those Moulton was defending when he served this country. He has the right to his opinion about them under the First Amendment (something some members of his party don’t seem to respect), but Second Amendment supporters need to use their First Amendment rights to point out just how badly he is missing the point on Second Amendment issues.
About Harold Hutchison
Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.
Kind of sounds like someone has decided to totally disregard the Constitution. So where did these Elected Servants all of a sudden come up with this assumed power, in their attempt to destroy the Bill of Rights anyway? The United States Constitution is to limit the power of Government not the American people.
Ok Harold. Lets ask a question. “However, his military service does not mean we should fail to call him out for going after our Second Amendment rights.” Your words right? Well, doesn’t it seem hypocritical that someone named Harold Hutchison, who is trying to pass himself off as such a stalwart second amendment supporter, has spent a very long time with dozens and dozens of articles attempting to lecture the real second amendment supporters of why we should be compromising with the Anti’s on the left? “This deceit alone makes Moulton a non-starter for Second Amendment supporters” Hmm, So what… Read more »
Anyone who knows the history of the twentieth century in Europe and Asia should know what the penalty is for registering and/or surrendering their guns. Somewhere between one hundred seventy million and two hundred sixty million citizens. Think about that number for a minute. That is half or more of the total population of the whole United States of America. Many of the people who were marched to open pits and shot execution style throughout Europe and Asia actually had supported the dictator and helped elect him. So what does that really mean? It means just because you are a… Read more »
People need to read and understand more than just the words in the Second Amendment. Why those few words were selected is more important than the words themselves. The reason for the Bill of Rights to even exist is based on government abuse and tyranny. The issue surfaced in Boston in 1768. Boston was occupied by the British Army and the soldiers became a huge part of the Boston population. Maybe doubling the adult male population. Then in 1773 the people of Boston dumped the King’s tea in the harbor. Still this seemed minor. Then in 1775 the patriots learned… Read more »
Harold misses the point that ANYONE that runs as a COMMIECRAT is someone who CANNOT BE TRUSTED, EVER. Harold mistakenly thinks that just because that someone served as a vet, that they should ‘get it’ with regards to the 2nd Amendment. However there are plenty of Commiecrats who served in the military, pukes like John Murtha and John Kerry. NO COMMIECRAT CAN EVER BE TRUSTED, NEVER EVER!! And neither can some Republicans (RINOs). What we need is a 2nd American Revolution, to flush out all the traitors so they can all be nailed. Politics and petitions for redress of grievances… Read more »
ARs, AKs etc are PRECISELY the sort of “arms” the 2nd Amendment protects! Its purpose is to establish that we have the means to keep our government under our control. So that when doofusses like this guy come up with these unconstitutional ideas we can tell them no and mean it!
That’s OK, Hutchinson misses the point on 2A also. He never saw a “compromise” he couldn’t buy into.
I don’t care what he served in nor where, it does NOT give him the right to strip me of my rights. he’s a swamper if ya ask me……..damn you’d think an ex-military guy that “foughtfor our countries rights” wouldn’t come home and try to make the 2nd A null and void. Some much for what HE was fighting for. Someone needs to bitch slap some sense into him.
Regardless of his ‘service,’ this anti-gun whack needs a daily refresher course in “our Rights!” Every member of Congress should be forced to watch the following testimony at least ONCE a month, perhaps once a week. Note, even bak-in-tha-day, the smirky condescending look on ole “Nose Under The Tent” Schumer, how obvious is that in telling you those ‘freaks of nature’ have no intention of allowing “We The Serfs” anything that ‘might’ affect them:
Dr. Susanna Gratia Hupp testimony before Congress
Harold, for once you were on a good roll. Yes, exposing the like of this Moulton dirtbag is a great service. But you had him up against the wall, but failed to drive home the real point: no matter his “service record”, since he is some sort of federal or state political office holde,r he had to have sworn an oath to uphold, protect, defend, enforce, the Constitutions of both his own state and of the United States. In his campaigning to remove our rights to arms, he violates that oath. In my view, that disquaifies him from any further… Read more »