United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- When it comes to those who wrongly attack the God-given rights protected by Constitution, including the right to keep and bear arms covered by the Second Amendment, there is the question as to who is the most dangerous. The short and easy answer is, “It depends on the electoral circumstances.” But that answer is arguably TOO short and simple. Reality tends to be a bit more complex.
For instance, Second Amendment supporters need to evaluate the threat level of hostile candidates using two primary components. The first is how extreme their agenda is. A candidate who favors licensing and registration along with a ban on modern multi-purpose semiautomatic firearms like those enacted by Australia or New Zealand will, as a general rule, be far more dangerous on the extreme agenda scale than one who just favors “red flag” laws.
Now, given that our ideal is NO infringement of the unalienable rights granted by our Creator, “red flag” laws supported by anti-Second Amendment extremists are a bad thing. For the sake of this discussion, we will be discussing “red flag” laws that fail to meet crucial standards necessary to protect our rights while still heading off a dangerous individual.
This brings us to the next part of the equation: The likelihood that an anti-Second Amendment extremist will be elected. Is that candidate generally leading in polls or near the top, like Joe Biden or Kamala Harris in the Democratic primary? Or are they trailing badly, like John Hickenlooper and Seth Moulton? Eric Swalwell was pushing an Australia/New Zealand-style confiscation and buyback, but he dropped out because he never got traction. Therefore, at the present time, Biden and Harris would, as a general rule, both be considered the more dangerous candidates in terms of getting the Democratic nomination.
Taking these two factors in combination, the general rule is that an anti-Second Amendment candidate with little chance to win and whose agenda is very limited (say, Bloomberg-favored “red flag” laws) is far less dangerous than one with a very good chance to win and who seeks to make America like some hybrid of New Jersey and New Zealand. That said, the general rule may not always apply. We’re focusing on just the gun laws front and ignoring key ancillary issues like judicial nominations and issues like campaign “reform.” This is how Jon Tester squeaked by in 2018.
There is also a bit of a wild card factor to this. A candidate with an extreme agenda – like Swalwell – could very well influence front-runners to adopt that extreme agenda. Swalwell, in his withdrawal statement, claimed that three top Democratic contenders had embraced his proposal for an Australia-style ban on modern multi-purpose semi-automatic firearms. We see this also in how court-packing has gained support across the Democratic field as well.
Similarly, the office held could matter, too. State attorneys general like Letitia James and Bob Ferguson have not only attacked NRA, but also USCCA, for the “crime” of trying to make sure members have a policy to cover legal fees in case they have to exercise their Second Amendment rights in self-defense. Andrew Cuomo has launched an existential threat to the entire panoply of pro-Second Amendment groups with his abuses against the NRA.
This all shows that the protection of our God-given right to keep and bear arms comes down to Second Amendment supporters being very informed, and then taking the steps to get involved. The 2020 election will be upon us soon, and the stakes are very high. Given the extreme anti-Second Amendment measures being proposed, and the support for court-packing, it may well be for all the marbles. Second Amendment supporters must act accordingly.
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.
What’s the penalty for violating your oath of office? Will some pro 2A lawyer please start suing these POS’s
All of them plus the Rhino Republicans they all don’t give squat about the 2nd Amendment!!!!!!!!!
To answer the question, it doesn’t make any difference which one is the most dangerous to the 2A. If you turn them inside out they would all look the same. The front runner, shotgun Joe, is sneakier than the rest and he would snatch the guns in a dark of the night order. Heels up Harris is a big mouth but she is mad enough at white people to do anything she can to make them uncomfortable. They are all for sale to the highest bidder, either Soros or Bloomburg.
While many on here complain about President Trump you really need to just sit back and think for a moment. Where would we as gun owners be if Hillary was in the White House? I think we would be in a much worse situation standing in line to turn in our semi automatic rifles after the cops come pounding on our doors. Just take a moment and think about it. We are so much better off with Trump than the other one. Quit complaining and get out and vote next time. Our freedoms depend on it, and not just about… Read more »
Unfortunately, Trump is no real friend of the Second Amendment. He merely sees benefit in being endorsed by Wayne La Lumpit and the NRA. Sadly, every election comes down to “Not Voting for Trump, but DEFINITELY VOTING AGAINST HILLARY”….the lesser of two evils.
WE wouldn’t be standing in line to turn in a single thing. If you choose to stand in line in order to surrender your arms, you don’t deserve them in the first place.
Much truth in what you write…
Make no mistake, the citizens of the U.S.A. will live in freedom or in slavery depending on the 2A. Getting rid of the 2A has nothing to do with gun control but it has everything to do with people control. Win or loose, you surrender your firearms, ammo, high capacity magazines and the like at your own peril. If you have not been adding to your collections, you might want to reconsider. If for no other reason than the police cant be everywhere all the time you should be armed 24/7. Not that anybody in their right mind would want… Read more »
Bravo. I could not have said it better sir. Thank you.
POTUS appoints to the SCOTUS. TRUMP 2020
Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2019/07/which-candidate-is-the-most-dangerous-to-the-second-amendment/#ixzz5u2VOYpJO
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook
Trump banned bump stocks, Reagan banned machine guns, heck all major gun legislation was written by the NRA and passed by the GOP all while they get you fools to think your fellow citizens are the problem… I will keep my guns as long as we get rid of the Lord of Lies, the criminal in chief, Putin’s Playmate!
Probably Trump, because when a Republican is in office, no one cares what kind of anti-2A executive orders get pushed.
jmb1911 hits the nail on the head. Any Democrat (Socialist) is a genuine threat to our 2nd Amendment rights. Citizens need to research candidates regarding their position on issues and they need to go out on election day and VOTE. This is not the time to sit out any election. I believe it was Patrick Henry who said, “These are the times that try men’s souls.” True words over 240 years ago and even more so today.
Trump banned bump stocks, Reagan banned machine guns, heck all major gun legislation was written by the NRA and passed by the GOP all while they get you fools to think your fellow citizens are the problem… I will keep my guns as long as we get rid of the Lord of Lies, the criminal in chief, Putin’s Playmate!
Hillary didn’t win, there is no need to get rid of her.
PhillyD
Thomas Paine
All the Democratic presidential candidates are dangerous in regards to the Second Amendment. red flag law violates a persons’s right to due process, NJ is a state with recently enacted red flag law. Mt. Hutchinson in this article mentions that a candidate wanting to have red flag laws isn’t as dangerous or a threat to the 2A , Sadly Mr Hutchinson they are as dangerous as all the presidential candidates who view the 2A as something outdated. It’ has nothing to do with crime control, The ant gun groups, and the anti gun pols who have been pushing and proposing… Read more »
@KenW You nailed it. Sitting at home behind the keyboard instead of voting allows this to happen. 30+% of households in America are gun owning which translates into 100+ million voters if only one adult in the home. Energize that many voters to root out the democrats and RINOs and you will accomplish your goals. BTW nothing near 50% turned out to vote in the general election, voting only gets ~30% participation and unfortunately the left is very good at getting the base out to vote. Conservatives should hire some of their campaign officials to consult, maybe the stranglehold on… Read more »
Washington voters last year brought us the unconstitutional, illegal, and ridiculous 1639 anti gun travesty of “law” .
HOW did this happen? I saw where someone who knows about such things figures ONLY @#% of Washington gun owners even VOTED last year. With this level of apathy how can anyone expect our rights to be preserved without some catastrophic upheaval?
Headline: “Which Candidate is the Most Dangerous to the Second Amendment?”
Any candidate with a (D) after their name, all RINOs, and anyone with an anti-second amendment record (meaning anyone that ever voted to pass a new infringement)
If people are stupid enough to vote in any of these communists we are done.
All democrats running for 2020 nomination are anti gun. All of them would do much more damage to 2nd. than anything Trump has done to gunowners.
Harris is not a “natural-born” citizen as at least one of her parents were not citizens at the time of her birth and yes, it matters. Not sure who signed off on this ho, probably Pelosi again like she did Obola.
That did not stop IslamoMarxist Barack Hussein Obumfook from defrauding his way into the White House : TWICE!
@StreetSweep and durabo, That is because the Electorial College did not screen barry out. It is the job of the electoral college to refuse to vote for unqualified candidates. The parties have made sure that the electoral college was firmly in hand long ago. The electoral college is supposed to be a check on the system, but the parties corrupted that check as the parties have corrupted many other checks and balances in our unique system.
Once all the votes are cast and tallied, it is far too late. It is NOT the job of the Electoral College to qualify or vet any candidate. Nope. EACH STATE that allowed the kinyun’s name to be put on the ballot had a Secretary of State that failed to do their duty. Of course, they all just took Nanny Pelosi’s sworn statement that he is eligible at face value. SHE should be behind bars for her purjury in that matter. SHE was head of the Dem party, and it was HER job to swear he is eligible. And she… Read more »
duh, that should have been 1639. Mods, how aobut an edit feature?
@TIo, I don’t know about county clerks or heads of parties, but I do know that the electors are required to “meet” and “vote”. What do you think is supposed to happen at the meeting prior to the vote? The Framers envisioned independent electors beholden to no one, not even the people, in choosing the president. If a candidate does not meet the Constitutional criteria, then the Framers anticipated that the electors would determine that and not vote their ballot for that person. Please see “The Evolving Constitution” Jethro Lieberman p 176. See also
Amendment XII
One parent is Indian (dot not feather) the other is Jamaican I believe it is…. neither being US citizens at the time of her birth.
WHY is she even still campiagning? SOMEONE must have the authority and solemn responsibiilty to stop this. No one did with the kinyun, and he’s by far the worst we’ve ever had as faux prez.
It’s simple – the candidate most dangerous to the 2nd Amendment is the one that actually wins the nomination and moves on to the general election. And I know that my next statement will cause some of you to REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE, but let’s face the facts: Donald Trump is still a better choice than any antigun Demonrat. At least he is willing to listen to reason, even change course on guns and actually defend the 2A. The Dems won’t. If they secure power for the forseeable future, they will utterly abolish the entire Bill of Rights starting with the 2nd Amendment.… Read more »
When people sit home on election day they enable this to happen. Posting on the net and calling the Dem commies and whining about Trump banning bump stocks does not get it. Voting and electing truly conservative pro-gun constitutional legislators locally and in Congress will accomplish more the electing POTUS. When only 50% of the population votes the problem becomes obvious.
ONLY 23% of Washingto State gun owners voted last November. If YOU are one of the 77% that did not vote, shut up as you do’t have a thing to say about any of this.YOU abdicated your sacred responsibility to DO something. And don’t tell me you didn’t have the time. Washington State is all mail/dropoff ballots. You get your ballot in the post, fill it out, and mail it in or drop it at local unmanned secure drop boxes all over the state. If you were in hospital for an extended “visit” you MIGHT have an excuse. Travelling in… Read more »
BINGO !
I know it’s a quibble, but this kind of metaphor mixing drives me nuts!
The expression is: “Useless as tits on a BOAR,” not a PIG. Pigs need tits to feed piglets. The other expression refers to, “sucking hind tut,” which implies being the least aggressive of the group and consequently, the last one to get fed. The piglet (or metaphorically, the person) in this position still gets fed. Hind tits don’t dry up any faster than others and are still just as useful as the others.
All Democrats (aka; progressives) have made NO bones about wanting to eliminate private ownership of firearms. Some Republicans (mostly rino’s) try to play the “lets play nice” game, and vote to infringe “just a little” on our 2A rights. President Trump is not perfect by a long shot (and that’s putting it nicely), BUT, he can be “molded” and he at least listens to what we say and how we feel. I’ll go with “the devil I know” rather than ANY democrat/progressive/marxist/communist…
Arms only have two enemy’s corrosion and politicians..
COrrosion is easily preventable AND mostly curable.
Might not look as pretty but every bit as effective. My EDC is a rusty old thing on the outside.. how I got it cheap. If it were clean and shiney it would be worth about $1200 used. Now its probably not even worth $400. Fine with me. I don’t stand there holding it in my hand looking at it.
Politicians, on the other hand………………
I would Trump so far is the most dangerous to the 2nd. Banning bump stocks. ATF rule change on AR length. Rumors of banning silencers. Trump takes the lead on anti 2nd.
If Hillary was POTUS your precious “Bump Stocks” would be the least of your worries. The biggest problem with bump stocks is that there was no reason them to exist in the first place., I’ve seen quite a few of these gizmos designed to simulate full auto (and yes I understand the legal difference) over the years for sale at gun shows only to see the same gizmos banned by BATFE. Do I think bump stocks should have been banned, no, because I know that bump stocks is not the issue at all. Eric Swalwell position on the Left’s idea… Read more »
how many guns has trump banned ???? ZERO and you know it. bump stocks are not firearms and no gun needs one to work. rrreeeeeeeeee. He did not ban them, he told atf to review them and the atf violated precedent and set guidelines in changing classification of them and in doing so set themselves up to get slapped down in court. other then a few words on suppressors he has done NOTHING about them and batf has said nothing, more fear mongering. Batf talking about rules, so what? they do that all the time to act like they are… Read more »
I agree with you.