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.