Promoting New Book, Sen. Murphy ‘Concedes’ Individual RKBA

Chris Murphy
Anti-gun Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) has a new book coming in which he magnanimously suggests liberals should “concede” the fact that the Second Amendment protects an individual right.

U.S.A.-(AmmoLand.com)- In the course of promoting his upcoming book about “America’s bloody obsession with firearms”—as explained by New York Times writer David Marchese—anti-gun rights Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) perhaps unintentionally provides an alarming look at the liberal living-in-denial mindset about guns that American gun owners urgently need to take seriously.

That may become a priority for the newly-announced “Gun Owners for Trump,” whose 18-member advisory board includes such luminaries as Ronnie Barrett, owner of Barrett Firearms, Olympic gold medalist Kim Rhode and Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Lamenting about how “gun-rights enthusiasts” have concluded anti-gunners ultimately want to adopt prohibitive gun control laws, Murphy magnanimously comments:

“That’s why in my book I propose that we concede that there is a private right to firearm ownership embedded in the Constitution. That is not a view shared by most progressives. Most progressives would say that is about the maintenance of militias. But I think it’s both historically accurate and politically smart to make clear that gun-control enthusiasts are bound by a Constitution that protects the right of individuals to own firearms for protection or to shoot for sport. It’s important for us to explain the limits of our proposals.”

That would be quite a “concession,” since the U.S. Supreme Court has already affirmed twice in recent history that the individual right to keep and bear arms does exist.

Murphy’s book, “The Violence Inside Us,” is due for release Sept. 1. Amazon’s promotional description of the book states;

“Murphy tells the story of his profound personal transformation in the wake of the mass murder at Newtown, and his subsequent immersion in the complicated web of influences that drive American violence.”

“Profound personal transformation” might be overly melodramatic, since in his interview with Marchese, Sen. Murphy acknowledges he has never owned a firearm.

“I’ve never owned any guns, and I haven’t ever shot a weapon,” Murphy admits. “That’s not out of principle. That act of pulling the trigger is so connected to what happens on the other side that I have never wanted to feel that sensation. I think it would be instructive to fire a semiautomatic rifle so that I can maybe talk more intelligently about what that gun does. But again, it would connect me to a set of emotions that I don’t know that I need to access.”

Of course, not, critics could argue. It is far easier to propose regulations on something, such as a constitutionally-protected fundamental right, when you are woefully ignorant about the subject matter.

Instead, the pro-gun control U.S. senator asserts the importance of building “a consensus and to make folks on the other side less scared of us.” That will not be easy when the standard-bearer of Murphy’s party, former Vice President Joe Biden, has a gun control agenda he wouldn’t even mention during his acceptance speech, and has stated publicly he will make former anti-gun Rep. Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke his administration point man on gun policy. It was O’Rourke who blurted last year during a primary debate in Houston, “Yell, yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47!”

Claiming he knows “how to talk about guns better than 99.9 percent of Americans,” Murphy tells the Times, “The greatest success of the gun lobby is to convince people that this is a third-rail issue that can’t be touched by politicians. This mythology starts in 1995 when Bill Clinton and others ascribed the Democratic losses in 1994 to a vote on the assault-weapons ban, which is crazy. The assault-weapons ban in 1994 was wildly popular…”

It may have been popular among people such as Murphy, but not so much among the millions of law-abiding Americans who owned the semi-automatic modern sporting rifles—guns deliberately misidentified as “assault rifles”—because they were the ones being penalized. Research in the aftermath of the ban’s sunset in 2004 suggested it had a negligible impact on violent crime, so it was not reauthorized.

But now comes Gun Owners for Trump, with the task of building grassroots activism and getting the “gun vote” out to re-elect the president. According to Gottlieb, Biden and the Democrats might make that easier than Murphy’s idea of getting gun owners to hop aboard the gun ban express.

“We’ve had time to examine Democrat Joe Biden’s extremist gun control plan—which he didn’t even mention during his acceptance speech—and it is truly alarming how his party is willing to turn a constitutional right into a tightly-regulated government controlled privilege,” Gottlieb said. “Donald Trump, on the other hand, has fulfilled one of his most important campaign pledges to America’s 100 million gun owners. The president has been filling federal court vacancies with experienced, constitutional judges who understand the Second Amendment means what it says.”

If he is re-elected, and the Senate remains under Republican control, the president could fill one or two more potential vacancies on the Supreme Court, which could pave the way for more Second Amendment clarification and restoration.

At the same time, the National Rifle Association’s Political Victory Fund has released its first television advertisement, available for viewing on YouTube.

It might be telling that the first comment in reaction to the Times interview with Murphy came from a man identifying himself as Mark Nuckols, and it was brutally candid.

“Well, I personally would support repeal of the Second Amendment,” Nuckols wrote, “and the confiscation of all privately owned firearms. Which will, of course, never happen. I support stricter regulation of guns, but effective gun regulation is a pipe dream. Background checks are not going to prevent most gun violence. And neither will a ban on assault rifles. And state regulation will always be undermined by the easy availability of guns in other states.”

Observations like that underscore the critical nature of the task Gun Owners for Trump has before it. Summed up by CCRKBA’s Gottlieb, “With the election just over two months away, we’re going to work vigorously to see President Trump re-elected to a second term so he may finish the job he started, not only making America great again, but making the Second Amendment great again in the process.”

RELATED: Biden’s Anti-Gun Agenda Would Turn Right into Privilege



About Dave WorkmanDave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

Subscribe
Notify of
28 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
MarkE
MarkE
23 days ago

Murphy claims he is more knowledgeable than “99.9 percent of all Americans” in discussing gun control. Well, then that leaves 320,000 who know more – the problem here is that Murphy is the one writing the laws. One might also contend that 99.9% of all weapons are never used in crimes – a stat probably more accurate if “99.9%” is your statistical benchmark…

Last edited 23 days ago by MarkE
sage419
sage419
23 days ago

Anyone too immature to deal with emotions created simply by firing a gun is not to be taken seriously. Unfortunately, we have to because his fellow snowflakes do…

Wass
Wass
23 days ago

The expression among police interrogators: “Every good lie starts with the truth”, applies here. Murphy concedes he is not familiar with firearms, while not addressing the Democrat Party’s obdurate stance on citizen gun rights. When the excrement hits the fan, he’ll throw in with the anti-gunners. It’s all a ploy to win some votes from 2A advocates.

Laddyboy
Laddyboy
23 days ago
Reply to  Wass

Mr. ‘murphy’s’ ploy is not working. LIARS will LIE —- incessantly!!!!!

Ryben Flynn
Ryben Flynn
23 days ago

The individual Right ALWAYS existed. It was Courts wrongfully interpreting the text of the 2nd. Amendment.
A 2nd Amendment Grammar Lesson | The Political Hat
http://politicalhat.com/2015/08/05/a-2nd-amendment-grammar-lesson/

Last edited 23 days ago by Ryben Flynn
uncle dudley
uncle dudley
23 days ago

Murphy acts like he has PTSD from the shooting at Newtown by a crazy basement dwelling nut who killed his mother and stole her firearms then committed mass murder of little kids and their teachers all the while Murphy admits he has never fired a gun.

DaveW
DaveW
23 days ago
Reply to  uncle dudley

Guess he never put his life on the line to preserve the Constitution for ALL Americans. By nullifying the 2d Amendment, he denies the right of the people to defend their rights against tyranny. He also denies people on either side of the aisle to have a change of heart; either to reject firearms or to adopt them based on personal life experiences, such as being mugged, raped, victim of spousal violence, home invasion, stalking, threats, Etc. We all know that Orders of Protection is a false flag which gives a false sense of security while providing no real security.

Tionico
Tionico
23 days ago
Reply to  DaveW

Murphy and his wretched ilk fail to comprehend the words of the Supreme COurt when they said the right to arms predates the COnstitution, does not derive from it, and thus cannot be done away with. That means even if Murphy manages to BUY enough votes to “repeal” that pesky Second Article, the God-given RIGHT remains. Anyone exercising it may become a “criminal” in terms of the new perverted laws, but the RIGHT will remain forever ours. And if they manage to take al the guns (hardee har har har on that one) there remain endless means of protecing ourselves… Read more »

Tionico
Tionico
23 days ago
Reply to  uncle dudley

Dont neglect to state that in that entire school facility there was only ONE PERSON who had any firearms. Change THAT and school shootings such as this one will end abruptly. This is a lesson that STILL has not been learned by politicians, who often vote against the very principle of allowing “good guys” that carry their own firearms eveyrwhere ELSE they go also being able to carry them in the schools where they work.
This is stupidity no matter how you slice it.

Dave in Fairfax
Editor
Dave in Fairfax
23 days ago

My letter to Sen Murpy, LENGTH WARNING Senator Murphy, In your book, “The Violence Inside Us,” you state, “I’ve never owned any guns, and I haven’t ever shot a weapon. That’s not out of principle. That act of pulling the trigger is so connected to what happens on the other side that I have never wanted to feel that sensation. I think it would be instructive to fire a semiautomatic rifle so that I can maybe talk more intelligently about what that gun does. But again, it would connect me to a set of emotions that I don’t know that… Read more »

Last edited 23 days ago by Dave in Fairfax
Jonesy
Jonesy
23 days ago

“Pencils do not misspell words and Guns do not Kill People” Cant remember just where I got this but in reference to Mr. Murphy, he is a typical Ass.

DaveW
DaveW
23 days ago

Excellent letter. The 2nd can not be changed except by the whole of the people participating. Politicians attempts to change it simply moves it from a right to a privilege. On the day the Revolutionary War broke out, British troops has been dispatched across Boston and the surrounding areas, with orders to confiscate all arms and munitions in the hands of the people, and to arrest named revolutionaries, particularly James Madison. The troops were dispatched on the night of April 18th 1775 (the night of Paul Reveres’ ride). The following morning the British troops were confronted by armed men. A… Read more »

Tionico
Tionico
23 days ago
Reply to  DaveW

you said: The 2nd can not be changed except by the whole of the people participating. NOPE Not true at all. Even SCOTUS have plainly stated the right to arms predats the Constitution, and does not derive nor depend upon that document. It is from God, and accrues to al men. Thus no political uprising or movement can change those facts, as they predate all political actions. Further, those words “shall not be infronged” do not constrain in any way who might be doing the infringing. Thus even if THE PEOPLE were to rise up and attempt to infringe upon… Read more »

nrringlee
nrringlee
23 days ago

In my experience with New Left Progressives I have found them to have many common experiences with Murphy. First, he admits he has never fired firearm. Common. You see, these mushrooms are protected all their lives by men far better than they. They have never had to go visit the dark side of human existence. They send us to do that work. They remain behind in their safe air conditioned spaces and pontificate as they smell their own methane and speculate on how the causes of human evil are all the fault of systems. These self-sustaining and self-reinforcing thought circles… Read more »

Rock
Rock
23 days ago

Murphy… Just another typical rights denying moron. Although this one actually comes out and SAYS that he is afraid to fire a semi auto rifle, basically BECAUSE HE MIGHT LIKE/ENJOY IT ! HIS fears makes him want to take OUR weapons. Good luck with that, airhead.
Real smart guy there, NOT !

Richard
Richard
24 days ago

Murphy says “I think it would be instructive to fire a semiautomatic rifle so that I can maybe talk more intelligently about what that gun does. But again, it would connect me to a set of emotions that I don’t know that I need to access.” That is about the worst liberal- babul I have ever read!.

Finnky
Finnky
23 days ago
Reply to  Richard

@Richard – I thought that statement provides a window to the darkness in his soul. He is afraid that shooting a rifle will release his dreams of killing people. He is unable to separate guns a violence because he is such a hateful and violent person, constrained not by his heart but by limits on his ability. Many “progressives” believe that merely holding a gun changes how one sees the world, causing one to see threats where there were none before. I’ve got to concede a smidge of realty there – just ask Ryan Whitaker. That view is not some… Read more »

J Gibbons
J Gibbons
23 days ago
Reply to  Finnky

That is exactly right. Look at the rioting occurring in liberal cities. More intelligent progressives see that and know that they would be unsafe if they had a gun. Therefore, no one should have one. Progressives truly believe everyone is as unhinged as they are.

estim8ing
estim8ing
23 days ago
Reply to  J Gibbons

I agree with the premises expressed however I would ask to be careful of what descriptive nouns we use when describing Leftists. These people are not “Progressives”. They are “Regressives” bent on the destruction of the American Experiment. A more accurate description would be Leftist, Maoist, Marxist, Socialist, Communist, Fascist, or Anarchist. Add “violent” in front of any of these to make them even more accurate.

Words mean things.

Huzzah!

Laddyboy
Laddyboy
23 days ago
Reply to  estim8ing

10,000 ^s for your comment!! REGRESSIVE/communist/socialist/democRAT/markist all the same —– just different spelling!!!!

Oldvet
Oldvet
23 days ago
Reply to  Finnky

@finnky …A light comes on you are a california trained psyco-ologist right ?

usc ??

Last edited 23 days ago by Oldvet
J Gibbons
J Gibbons
23 days ago
Reply to  Richard

Like maybe the emotion of enjoyment or self-satisfaction. Or how about self-reliance and personal safety.

nrringlee
nrringlee
23 days ago
Reply to  Richard

But eyes that shall not see, ears that shall not hear are impervious to reason and fact. Murphy is one such case. He is simply a political opportunist sans principle.

Tionico
Tionico
23 days ago
Reply to  nrringlee

political opportunist sans principle.

h he has PRINCIPLE alright. Hos own self-aggransidement and the increase of his own wealth and power are his guiding principles.

Tionico
Tionico
23 days ago
Reply to  Richard

It does reveal him to be an emotion-driven, non0rational being. Perhaps his panties are overly small…. WHERE do all these effeminate politicians come from anyway? Used to be all the folks seeking elective office h-were MEN of vigour and vision, who had grabbed life by the throat, wrassled it to the gornud, and WON, haivng built up successful lives by the sweat of their brows, and in their more quiet later years, stepped up to SERVE as leaders, based on solid and admirable experience and the wisdom learned from that, not seeking to make a career outof their service, but… Read more »

Darkman
Darkman
24 days ago

This just seems appropriate here. It was said during an interview about “Cancel Culture”.
“If people cannot control their own emotions, then they have to start controlling other people’s behaviors” – John Cleese.