Setting the Right Priorities to Defend the Second Amendment

Second Amendment Courts Judges Strict Scrutiny
Setting the Right Priorities to Defend the Second Amendment

Washington, D.C. – -(AmmoLand.com)- When it comes to defending our Second Amendment rights, there are a lot of potential fights. We are seeing attacks on multiple fronts, along with efforts to move forward on some other issues. But what should be the biggest priority? Do we fight bump stock and suppressor bans? Do we focus on getting judges who will enforce our Second Amendment rights? What about the many fights at the state and local levels of government?

We have to understand that there is only so much time in the day, and only so many resources. What legislation do we push? We could focus on constitutional carry in a state, but it would mean we ignore other Second Amendment issues, like maybe passing state-level protections against corporate gun control by banks and companies like Salesforce.

Similarly, at the federal level, given the current situation, we can’t really pass pro-Second Amendment legislation. But what can be done is to keep the confirmation of judges who will uphold Heller. Another thing that the Senate can do: Hold hearings. It might seem like a show, but with proper work, those hearings can put pressure on companies like Salesforce. In addition, there is always the chance to force votes on vulnerable anti-Second Amendment Senators.

But it also comes down to making decisions. President Trump did go along with an administrative bump-stock ban that was more about being seen to do something than actually addressing a problem. He’s also making some comments on suppressors as well. But at the same time, he is making the kinds of judicial nominations that will keep our Second Amendment rights safe for decades – unless the Supreme Court is packed.

It’s another way of setting priorities in defending the Second Amendment. Do we fight a short-term skirmish over bump stocks and suppressors, or do we focus on getting judges who can throw out anti-Second Amendment laws passed in places like California and New Jersey? Reasonable Second Amendment supports can make arguments either way.

As Duane Liptak said on this site a while back, those who choose to primarily focus on judges are not thrilled with the suppressor comments or the bump stock ban – but they are dealing with a political landscape as it is, and adjusting their tactics and strategy to deal with it. We are at the mercy of events, too. A mass shooting could give Bloomberg and other anti-Second Amendment extremists momentum to pass bad legislation that has to be blunted. Abuses by Andrew Cuomo have also forced adjustment of plans.

So, what are the priorities through 2020? The top priorities are four-fold: First, continuing the confirmation of judges who would uphold Heller and provide rulings like the one by the district judge in the Duncan case. Second, ensure the re-election of President Trump and a pro-Second Amendment Senate, to keep the judicial confirmations going. Third, address the abuses of power coming from the Cuomo regime – and any copycat efforts elsewhere. Fourth, begin work to pass laws to address corporate gun control from companies like Salesforce. Everything else will have to be secondary at this point.

Defending the Second Amendment is more than just saying “No.” Often it’s about making hard choices about what legislation to push – or whether efforts need to be spent on other issues. Second Amendment supporters need to keep that in mind, or we could lose our rights.

Harold Hu, chison


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.

  • 78 thoughts on “Setting the Right Priorities to Defend the Second Amendment

    1. While I may still be mad about bump-stocks given the extra-legal treatment they received, banning suppressors (or any confiscatory act) is my hard line, period. Should things ever go sideways in this country (a very real possibility), the words of Quislings like Harold here will not be forgotten, nor forgiven.

    2. It’s the bill of rights..It does not give government any authority..Its the “right” of the “people” and “shall not” be infringed..Regulate means Adjust to a particular standard, rate amount degree etc…thus well regulated, the people are the militia..”If government shall be obliged to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people”…Hamilton….” The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people” Tench Coxe

    3. James Barry, how about sticking a gun up your ass and pulling the trigger. NOBODY needs you or your dumb ass opinion. You must be related to Eric Swallows!!!!!

      1. Hey why don’t you take you own advice you moron, the upday they take away gun rights is the day the people will, revolt the second amendment was put there so people like you a d any body trying to change or take over this country we would spot them but you live in a fantasy world why don’t you go live in China

    4. How about getting some high-end lawyers to push for invalidating the Illinois FOID card. That will go a long way to showing that the 2nd Amendment is a RIGHT and you don’t pay to exercise your rights!

      1. Do you want the Feds to decide what weapon carry should look like? Once you let their foot in the door, you know what will happen.

        1. Talk about being behind the 8 ball! That “foot in the door” happened 85 years ago with passage of the ‘National Firearms Act of 1934.’ And that’s just the Feds, not counting the myriad of local & state ordinances like New York’s ‘Sullivan Act’ of 1911.

          1. Yes, they are involved in the sale and manufacture of firearms. You see how that went. Now, do you want them involved in the carry of firearms?

            …doomed to repeat it and all that.

      2. Look at Article 4, Sections 1 and 2 of the U.S. Constitution. We already are supposed to HAVE reciprocity.

      1. Excellent points. And we should, indeed, keep reading what he spews. Knowing one’s enemy is a valuable thing.
        “The general who knows his enemy, and who knows himself, will never meet defeat in a thousand battles” -Sun Tzu, “The Art of War”

      2. I think he got his student loans paid off! I didn’t join the NRA but instead my local state gun group.

    5. The biggest question is why do we have to defend our Rights?
      Anyone who is anti Constitution should be removed from their position for clearly violating their oath of office. But no one in government is ever removed for lying because that’s just what these vipers do. Only the common citizens have to tell the truth and follow laws these honorable crooks impose on “We the People”.

      1. Because what you don’t defend someone else will take away from you. And they’ll dynamically change definitions or arrange “optics” to make you look like the bad guy and blame you for what they’re doing. It is and will be a constant struggle.

        1. Ditto.
          Liberty is not a permanent feature of life. The founding generation believed posterity is solely responsible for defending or losing it, nothing is guaranteed.

    6. “Second, ensure the re-election of President Trump and a pro-Second Amendment Senate, to keep the judicial confirmations going.”
      The only good Trump has done for the 2A. Otherwise, he’s been a failure as a 2A president.

      “Third, address the abuses of power coming from the Cuomo regime – and any copycat efforts elsewhere.”
      Oh, you mean like CALIFORNIA’S been doing since Reagan was in office and signed the Mulford Act and the NRA hasn’t done dick about? Oh, okay, Mr. Hutchins, how exactly does one “address” those abuses???

      “Fourth, begin work to pass laws to address corporate gun control from companies like Salesforce. Everything else will have to be secondary at this point.”
      This is a complete non-issue compared to many other 2A issues that need to be addressed. Don’t like Salesforce’s politics? Vote with your dollars and stop using Salesforce.

      Hutchins seems a dweeb and completely naive about the 2A issues we face today. How old is he, anyway, twelve?

      1. Smearing Hutchison accomplishes jack-sh*t. Though Trump is conflicted concerning the 2nd amendment there was always Hillary, or maybe in 2020 Biden or other gun grabbing destroyer of liberty for you to whine about.

    7. The most important and the most difficult decision is to decide exactly when we will need to start shooting.

      1. Most people talking about “start shooting people” in this context have never served, never experienced combat, and never witnessed civil war up close. Talk to someone who has done some of these things and your mind will change! This isn’t like in the movies where the righteous wins triumphant with patriotic music playing in the background. Be prepared to lose friends and family members in guerrilla warfare! Be prepared to be betrayed by your neighbors or friends. Be prepared to be maimed for life or even killed! Be prepared to lose a civil war with a tyranny rising from its ashes.

        Thanks to people like Harold Hutchison, we can’t even get the millions of gun owners motivated to unite and peacefully protest in the streets against existing and new gun laws.

        1. Nor do they consider the bad actors from the outside that will be waiting at our front door to take advantage. Nor do they consider the unholy alliances they would have to form to win such a battle. Etc., etc., etc….

        2. I don’t need to go very far at all to talk to someone who has done it… For your edification:

          “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”
          Patrick Henry.

          Yes when it happens I am prepared to die, lose loved ones and eat rats. How about you? What is this Country worth to you? Hutchinson is a milquetoast, a shill for the left and possibly a traitor.

            1. Patrick Henry now sloganeering? Listen to CF? You Trolls are working together now I see. Hutchinson must be paid by Soros.

          1. I wasn’t talking about quoting Patrick Henry! I was talking about people that have experienced civil war up close in the last few decades, such as in Romania, Bosnia and Syria. Your chest-thumping bravado will quickly disappear when the reality of civil war sets in.

            Again, talk to people that didn’t grew up in the US and actually had to fight for their freedom at great cost. Talk to people born in Romania, where communist secret service snipers were randomly shooting people in the streets. Talk to people the grew up in Bosnia, where thousands of people were ethnically cleansed (killed). Talk to people from Syria, where different waring factions indiscriminately kill civilians, some with poison gas.

            1. Nice try Troll. i have lived abroad extensively and seen things like you describe. Go work the other side of the street where you belong. No one in their right mind wants what is coming, but it is coming.

            2. “The most important and the most difficult decision is to decide exactly when we will need to start shooting.”

              No one who experienced civil war or has talked to people that did would ever say stuff like this, only keyboard commandos would. Also, the US is far, far away from a civil war. The vast majority of people are not ready to shoot their neighbors over a political argument and lose the country they live in in the process.

              Your statement is also completely ignorant of history and purely based on emotions. As I said in my first reply to you, we can’t even get the millions of gun owners motivated to unite and peacefully protest in the streets against existing and new gun laws. What makes you think that they will be motivated to “start shooting people”?

            3. @Quartermain, We’ll win no civil wars by sending allies to the other side of the street because of a small difference of opinion.
              We may have the stomach for a bloody civil war, but we do not have the logistics, the secure comms, the leadership, a plan or even a target list. We can, however, accomplish our goals by picking “not corrupted yet” candidates for the primary elections. The party hacks fear and loath the “not corrupted yet” candidate.
              A more powerful weapon than war is FUN. Throw a party or barbecue for the “not corrupted yet” candidate. We do have the logistics for that.

    8. Too much attention to bump stocks and suppressors. Return to our sporting roots-hunting and target shooting. All this “stop the threat” nonsense does is give anti-gunners more bad air time against us. If you are so concerned about your safety, either move or just keep a low profile. That $1500 customized 1911 will disappear forever into an evidence locker even if the shooting is justified. Quit glamorizing legitimate self-defense with pseudo-military jargon and hardware.

      And quit complaining about Trump. Who the Hell else is there to vote for??

      1. Hunting and target shooting have as much to do with the Second Amendment as video games. Virtually none. The Second Amendment isn’t a right to hunt.

      2. “Return to our sporting roots-hunting and target shooting.”

        Our roots are not sporting at all, unless we’re talking about hunting redcoats and target shooting the buttons on their chests.

      3. The 2d amendment was wholly and explicitly crafted for a people’s need to be armed against tyranny foreign or domestic. Though ‘hunting and target shooting’ are social and cultural customs dating to the dawn of the colonial period, the 2nd has absolutely nothing to do with plinking or deer hunting, let alone fishing.

      4. Our ROOTS are in bloody revolution. We are not violent until pushed too far on things that really matter.

    9. STOP SCREWING AROUND WITH THE CONSTITUTION AND JUST PROSECUTE TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW THE INDIFFERENT IDIOTS WHO OBTAIN WEAPONS UNDER QUESTIONABLE MEANS THEN HARM PEOPLE WITH THEM. ADOLF HITLER GAINED POWER THANKS TO GOVERNMENTS WHO APPEASED HIM. STOP APPEASING THE IDIOTS WHO ARE GAINING POWER THROUGH GOVERNMENTS WHO APPEASE THEM AT THE EXPENSE OF AND DETRIMENT TO LAW ABIDING CITIZENS. LET THE PUNISHMENT OF THESE OFFENDERS WHO HARM PEOPLE WITH QUESTIONABLY OBTAINED WEAPONS FIT THE CRIMES THEY HAVE COMMITTED. STOP PREVENTING LAW ABIDERS FROM ENJOYING LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS

      1. How’s about making certain those who through laziness, incompentence, or outright corruption, who FAILED to do that with which they were charged to do as a part of their official function, thus enabling murders to get their guns “legally”.
        Exhibit One: the two different Air Force desk jockeys whose assigned task it was to report the three felonies and dishonourable discharge from the Air FOrce to the FBI/NICS databases. They have become accessories to those murders, need to be dealt with on that basis.
        Oh, I’m so sorry, I forgot” is no defense. Their failure to discharge their assigned duties led directly and proximally to the deaths of those murdered at the Sutherland Springs Baptist Church
        Same with “Sheriff” Isreal and the rest of the Cowards of Broward County Florida, along with the Parkland School District hooh hahs who COLLUDED to not charge the Douglas High School murder with the several felonies he is known to have committed in the two or so years prior to his “Big Day”. Had he been so charged with any one of the four I know of, he could not have “legally” purchased his rifles or ammunition.
        Until THESE sorts of actors are held to account for their utter failure to DO THEIR JOBS, the sloppiness will continue, even increase. And I am NOT asking for a slap on the wrist of malfeasance, failure to perform, etc No , I”m talking about serious felony crimes of accessory, enabling, etc. Over thirty people are DEAD because of thesegovernment officials and their incompetence.

    10. Harold Hutchison is continuing dividing the gun culture one article at a time. He apparently is preparing us now for the inevitable cave-in by the NRA on a federal silencer ban.

      Giving up rights is not prioritizing fighting for them. It is just that, giving up rights. Like so many, Harold Hutchison still does not understand the legal implications of applying the Chevron deference to US gun laws, which is what the bump stock ban did. No, the NRA and President Trump did not prioritize, they just threw hundreds of thousands of gun owners under the bus for political convenience. The legal implications are far reaching and will allow a future President (or even this one, who knows) to outlaw all semi-automatic firearms with a simple change in federal regulations. What’s next? Will millions of gun owners be thrown under the bus by the NRA and President Trump with a silencer ban?

      Will the NRA ever hold President Trump accountable for his repeated anti-gun stance? Why should we vote for Gun Control Donald in 2020? Will he speak again at the NRA Annual Meeting in 2020? Will NRA members continue to cheer for the President that has taken away their rights?

      No one argues that we should NOT focus on confirming judges and justices. This article presents a fallacy to justify one cave-in after another. With hundreds of millions of Dollars at its disposal, the NRA could fight on many fronts, but is just doesn’t want to do that.

      1. Absolutely correct Charlie, my thoughts precisely. This fool Harold believes we need to give up some rights so we can save other rights? Makes no sense at all. How about we fight to keep ALL of our rights? We need to remember: WE ARE RIGHT, THEY ARE WRONG!!! It really is that simple folks. It is up to all of us to change the conversation every day, every chance we get.

      2. A start would be to quit calling suppressors “silencers.” Suppressors are safety equipment, which lowers the sound to a less harmful level. Are not gun-grabbers all about safety?
        Trump may not be perfect in supporting our rights but, would you prefer Creepy Joe Biden or any of the others that break out of the democrat clown car? Hopefully, Trump will be able to appoint another Constitutional Justice to the SCOTUS. This cannot happen unless he and the republican senate is reelected.
        Reality is far from perfect.

        1. No! Maxim called them silencers in his 1921 patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US1482805. I don’t care for political correctness. Education about what they do and what they don’t is more important than arguing about what we call them! The Brits call them moderators, by the way, and the Germans call them Mündungssignaturreduzierer (muzzle signature reducer). I DON’T FRACKING CARE!

          President Trump has done more damage to 2A rights in his 2+ years than President Obama did in his 8 years! Why? Because President Trump is doing gun control as a Republican. That’s it. He is the NRA-endorsed President and caused more gun control than any other President in the last 20 years. He is not held responsible and people like you are the problem!

          SCOTUS was perfectly fine with not hearing the silencer case and was perfectly fine with not enacting a TEMPORARY restraining order regarding the bump stock ban. The, so called, “Constitutional justices”, simply aren’t constitutional. They are political, just like the other justices.

          Again, no-one is arguing that we should NOT focus on confirming judges and justices. The idea that this should be the only thing we should be focusing on is ridiculous. This article is spot on: https://bearbussjaeger.wordpress.com/2019/06/13/how-much-is-bloomberg-paying-you-harold/. This article above could have been written by Bloomberg himself.

      3. If the Boston tea party started over a 2% tax how would The Founding Father feel about
        A 20% Federal tax on money earned from hard work
        A 9% State tax on average to buy anything in a store
        An ‘Adjustable’ convenience fee for most forms of travel
        A State fee on your RIGHT to carry concealed in almost all 50 states
        They would’ve already started a new 1776 when the Hughes Amendment, The NFA, and The ‘Assault Weapons Ban’ were a pipe dream!!!!!
        They fought, sacrificed EVERYTHING, died, and wrote a Constitution to prevent what’s going on now SPECIFICALLY!!!!!!!!!!
        WE THE PEOPLE ARE A DISGRACE TO THOSE WISE INDEPENDENT AND FREE MEN WHO CAME BEFORE US!!!!!

        1. The tax itself was incidental to destroying the tea as the vast majority of colonists participated in a barter economy. Coin, specie was rare as King and Parliament refused to establish banks in the colony’s keeping commoners and merchants enslaved to British mercantilism.

          The primary goal however was the elimination in the minds of the colonists of any claims to British rights & liberties, that they were nothing more than servants and/or slaves of the Crown & Parliament. That’s why the tea wound up in the harbor, not for the value of some tax few could pay in coin except in transcriptional exchanges for goods and services.

          1. @ahhiyawa, That barter and cash economy could come in real handy again, too! Eventually the libtards will get into power again. When they do, they might use the power of government to try to subjugate us. The time to store up everything that you and your loved ones are going to need and support our phalangnites in the field, to include cash, is now.

      4. Hutchinson dividing gun owners? Can’t say one way or the other, but what is not debatable is his tactical assessment of the battle terrain from a political and legal view..This messy fight over gun ownership goes back decades, generations when white people banned blacks & slaves from firearms ownership in the early 1800’s.

        Slave holding was dying out in the South until the invention of the ‘cotton mill’ made slavery profitable. A classic example of how technology in the name of the buck, mammon can promote tyranny as well as freedom. There’s legions of American’s, dead or alive who bear guilt and responsibility for today’s struggle over the 2nd.

    11. “Similarly, at the federal level, given the current situation, we can’t really pass pro-Second Amendment legislation.”

      But for the first two years of Trump’s presidency, we had every opportunity to do so … and nothing got done. Why should we not hold our politicians to account for that failure?

      1. but we DO need to hold the feet of our existing senators to the HOT fire as the Dem subverted sorry excuse of a House of Representatives with all the beyond scary “common sense” new gun restrictions they are cooking up. If ANY of those get passed into law over a lazy or complacent Senate we’ll be decades in trying to get them gone again.

        1. Of course. And we usually have an opportunity to send the correct message in the primaries.

          I vote in every primary. Do you?

      2. Hutchinson is right. A snow ball’s survivability in hell has a better chance than passage of pro-gun or anti-gun legislation in Congress.

    12. Let’s work on the four words in the Second Amendment, “Shall Not Be Infringed!” Get that idea across to the Supreme Court and all the other problems will be solved.

      1. How about we focus on the entire 2nd amenment instead of picking a random statement out of context. The very first sentence is the most important… A WELL REGULATED MILITIA… next, ” being necessary to the security of a free state”… it says NOTHING about the right of every person; rich, poor, mentally deranged, violent, or what have you, to have and to hold any weapon they choose and want ifor any reason n their wildest dream. Are you all in a well regulated militia? Then gun ownership is a privilege, not a right. READ and UNDERSTAND the entire amemdment, don’t just pick and choose what you want to believe out of context.
        2nd Amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

        1. @plm clearly you are unread in history. Yes we are all part of the militia. We will not loose our rights to self defense of self and country. Well regulated means well equipped. Yes let’s look at the whole amendment and not pick and choose. I agree with you there. Read your history and read it in context.

          1. @Ben, Pimp can not even read the Second Amendment much less history. He thinks that the 2A is more than one sentence. He thinks the introductory clause more important than the subject and verb. He thinks that the founders should have written the Second Amendment the way he wants it written two hundred years later. And he put some extra commas in it.

        2. Commas are important to anyone using English appropriately. The amendment reads: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
          being necessary to the security of a free State is a dependent clause with the Militia as the object. Dependent clauses can be dropped out of the sentence, replaced by an “and”, without changing the meaning of the sentence.

          A well regulated Militia and the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

          In addition, “people” is used very sparingly in the Bill of Rights always referring to the individual.

        3. Plm, so you are saying the Second Amendment is not in the Bill of RIGHTS, but it is in the Bill of PRIVILEGES? Can you show us a copy of the Bill of Privileges?

        4. The very first sentence is the most important

          News flash: there is ONLY ONE SENTENCE that comprises the entire ammendment.

          I suspect you mean “clause”… and no, the first one is NOT the most important. You obviously attended gummit skewlz and thus did NOT learn how to diagramme a sentence.

          First, find the SUBJECT…. in case you are confused “militia” is not the subject of the sentence. It is a side word in a supporting or descriptive clause. No, the subject is the word “RIGHT”. Which right? Here, the one to keep and bear arms.

          Second, find the VERB. In this case it is not “regulated” (that is an adjective anyway), it is the verb “infringe”. There are some modifiers to that verb which, in sum, render the verb a negative imperative, in other words a mandate to NOT do what the verb is. It is also in the passive voice, which means the action is not dependent upon the subject, nor the object, of the verb. It essentilly means that no force shall act in a way that causes infringement of the subject, the RIGHT.

          Lastly, lets examine the placement and relationship of the object of the prepositioinal phrase, “of the people” which describes or specifies the right. That right pertains to THE PEOPLE.. which means ALL people resident lawfully within the new nation.

          An interesting side note for your amusement: milita ARE the people… so, since the PEOPLE comprise militia, the right to arms MUST be “of the people” not “ov the ,ilitia”. It is every individual resident with his own state that has the right. His “membership” or active involvement with his own local town militia is not a pre-condition for his exercising his right to arms. His guaranted right to arms is the thing that assures militia will have access to arms as needed to assure “the security of a free state’. And herethe word “state” is not the specific political organisations named as states, 13 of which originally formed the United States. .

          Go back to grammar school and learn GRAMMAR and you will see your own folly, ignorance, and/or bias.

          Might not hurt to READ the entire Constitution, and at least some of the Federalist Papers

      2. The Second Amendment also states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The Heller and MacDonald decisions stated that the right is an individual right. Furthermore, the Federalist Papers support the individual right concept. Also, the Bill of Rights were based on God-given rights and/or natural rights. Finally, the U.S. Constitution would not have been ratified except for the inclusion of the Bill of Rights, which LIMITS the Government in its ability to infringe on individual rights.
        P.S. See 14th Amendment and incorporation.

    13. The problem with cutting the gov’t off from the required tax money needed is that it would require every American to stop sending there money to the federal gov’t and all at pretty much the same time. How are we going to get that to happen? I agree that it is something that needs to happen, it is really the only way to send the gov’t a message that you are not working for the people anymore and we are fed up and so we aren’t going to give you the one primary thing you need which is our hard earned money which should be staying in our pockets to begin with being taxation is theft. I would surely join in on something like this, it is high time that we taught the losers in DC who is the real boss, and that is the people that control the money they are given to spend, that is WE THE PEOPLE!

    14. Me personally, I’m in the tax revolt phase. I’m tired of going to rallies, signing petitions, and voting for the lesser of multiple evils. I’m exhausted, my money is not infinite so throwing more money at agencies like the NRA only appears to wind up in that LaPierre guy’s pockets, and my time is not infinite, attending legislative audiences in local govt. I was not cursed with this Sisyphean task of forcing liberal progressives to listen. I am finished with that. Stop sending these fools our tax money. If that doesn’t send the proper message, the next (and final) phase is to water the Tree of Liberty. Molon Labe.

      1. You’re not going to do any watering or riding a shield. If you’re already complaining about sacrificing time and money you’re not going to suddenly shirk the cloak of comfort of the middle class. The right thing always requires sacrifice. Instead of giving money and washing your hands of any other responsibility, go organize your neighbors and start policing your own neighborhood. Start taking back the responsibility you’ve abdicated to the State and then they won’t have the means to enforce fascist laws. But knock off the grandstanding, no one believes you.

      1. Ummmm, firearms are inanimate. They don’t really DO anything.
        The most popular automobile kills too according to that defunct logic. A drunk gets behind the wheel, wipes out a family of four, and everyone cries out “there are too many Toyota Corollas on the road! Ban cars!!”
        Spoons didn’t force feed your fat mother, pencils didn’t spell incorrectly, all rocks aren’t bad because one was used for murder, and firearms, no matter how many of them there are, didn’t kill a single soul. Please get educated, your ignorance is showing.

        1. Dwest, you are trying to piss out a forest fire. This guy is a cuck, a beta. If someone were to break into his house, he would be hiding in a closet, probably crying sitting in a pile of his own filth. The cops will arrive after the invader leaves and maybe this guy survives the ordeal, maybe not. I know what would happen if I were in that situation, one less thug. His ilk does NOT understand that criminals don’t obey laws, hence the word criminal. If laws worked we wouldn’t need police, but that is just common sense. If gun free zones worked, no mass shootings, see where I’m going with this rant. I think people like him love to be a victim but not me, I prefer to be the victor.

        2. been saying that for a long time. people want something to blame, not someone because they don’t want to be seen as a hater. emotions are a good thing to have, but you should not let them rule your life. most people have been given higher intellect than animals who operate on natural instinct. please use that intellect and make rational decisions.

      2. False.
        It isn’t that simple, but you seem to be.

        More guns equals less crime.
        That’s a statistic that is actually true.

      3. guns do not kill, people use them to kill, I can lay a gun on a table loaded and ready and I would bet my life that it won’t shoot anything with out someone pulling the trigger

      4. Your a fool that can not read literature, data, or (confirmed) statistics.

        Read even one book by John Lott and realize how stupid your comment is, unless your afraid to face the fact that you have been hornswoogled by Mother’s against Guns.

        Even after Obama was handed the facts by John, and his own FBI data he continued to spew the rhetoric that the US was the 1st in mass murders, in reality I think we were like 48th.

        Get your facts correct or you’ll continue to look like a fool!

      5. If you aren’t joking, my question to you james is, “Are you stupid or what?” If you are serious then you are obviously a liberal brain-dead sheep who can’t or won’t think for yourself and a waste of oxygen. Go away and troll elsewhere, or LOL, good one.

      6. RE: “More guns kill more people”

        Correct. The US has the highest number of lawful defensive guns uses on the planet and we need to maintain that.

      7. Apparently, you fail to understand how self defense works.
        More people able and willing to defend themselves means fewer people get killed.
        It’s really that easy.

      8. funny thing happened on the way to Reality Faire this week, James.

        We now have far more guns in the hands of THE PEOPLE than we did before the kinyun usurped the White House. (no small thanks to HIM) Yet the numbers of people being killed each year by gun-involved homicides has been steadily shrinking. Since the kinyun ascended the White House Steps and occupied, we have nearly doubled the number of firearms in private hands (and close to uadrupled the umber of guns in the hands of goverment operatives…)Yet the number og firearms related homicides hs at least 20% less then before the kinyun was unlawfully elected. Don’t believe me? Read FBI numbers of new firearms purchases since 2008, and estimates of how many are “out there”. Next go to FedGov’s CDC site and read about means of death…. they keep numbers on such things.

        If the gun in YOUR hands is likely to kill people, I have a simple solution for you: DONT PICK IT UP.

        None of my guns, nor any of the hundreds more I know of in the hands of my friends and assiciates have ever killed anyone. Maybe we need to lauhcn a class action lawsuit, they must all be defective cause none of them have ever killed anyone.

      9. If that canard were true, the murder rate in the U.S. would have INCREASED instead of ACTUALLY DECREASING since 1992 when since that year the number of guns in the hands of the people of the U.S. DOUBLED.

        YOU ARE THEREBY DEFINED AS A LIAR

    Leave a Comment 78 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *