Opinion
In the past few days, Kyle Rittenhouse sparked a significant controversy in the gun rights community. He initially announced his intention to write in Ron Paul for President instead of supporting former President Donald Trump.
Kyle Rittenhouse says he won’t vote for Trump because he isn’t strong enough on 2A. Sorry Kyle, but this is a mistake, IMO.
He’s suffering Pathological Idealism, a common issue. We need to know our ideals, but have to be practical strategy for them. Throwing your vote away with… pic.twitter.com/jHTDg7Niwi
— Justin Deschamps | Truth Social @Justindeschamps (@JustinStillness) August 2, 2024
This statement drew considerable attention and criticism from Second Amendment advocates, who saw it as a misstep in the broader strategy to protect gun rights. However, Kyle recently revised his stance after engaging in “productive conversations” with Trump’s team. He now fully supports Donald Trump and urges fellow gun owners to do the same!?
The Importance of Strategic Voting
Mark Smith, the host of Four Boxes Diner, addressed this issue in a recent video. He emphasized that while it is crucial to stay principled, strategic considerations must also play a significant role in voting decisions.
Here are the key points he made:
- Real-World Implications:
- Judicial Appointments: Trump has appointed three Supreme Court justices—Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, and Brett Kavanaugh—who have been pivotal in upholding Second Amendment rights. Conversely, a potential presidency under Kamala Harris would likely result in judicial appointments hostile to gun rights.
- Executive Orders: Smith highlighted the risk of executive orders from a Harris administration that could severely restrict gun ownership, such as reclassifying semi-automatic rifles as machine guns.
- Strategic Retreats for Long-Term Gains:
- Smith compared the temporary concessions in the gun rights battle to strategic retreats in warfare. For instance, the controversial bump stock ban by Trump was a tactical move to prevent a broader legislative redefinition of machine guns, which could have had far-reaching negative consequences for gun owners.
- The Danger of Utopian Ideals:
- Writing in a candidate like Ron Paul or James Madison, while principled, does not affect real-world outcomes. In the context of the current political landscape, such actions are seen as counterproductive. Supporting a candidate with a realistic chance of winning and who aligns significantly with pro-gun values is a more effective strategy.
Rittenhouse’s Revised Position
Over the past 12 hours, I’ve had a series of productive conversations with members of the Trump’s team and I am confident he will be the strong ally gun owners need to defend our Second Amendment rights.
My comments made last night were ill-informed and unproductive. I’m 100%…
— Kyle Rittenhouse (@ThisIsKyleR) August 2, 2024
Kyle Rittenhouse’s recent statement reflects a logical, big-picture understanding of these strategic considerations. By now backing Donald Trump, he aligns himself with a pragmatic approach to preserving Second Amendment rights. While some say he was browbeaten into this shift in position, it nevertheless underscores the importance of unity and strategic voting within the gun rights community.
Its a MEME, folks…
Get Out The VOTE
Staying principled and strategic is vital in the fight to protect our Second Amendment rights. The real-world implications of our voting decisions cannot be ignored. As gun owners, we must support candidates who have a proven track record of defending our rights and who have a realistic chance of winning elections. Kyle Rittenhouse’s revised stance is a reminder that, in politics, sometimes compromise and strategic alignment are necessary to achieve long-term goals. Let’s stand together and make our votes count.
For more insights and analysis, follow our friend, Mark Smith at Four Boxes Diner, on Youtube and stay informed about the latest developments affecting our rights.
The hate this kid is getting on some forums is very much like the hate from liberal Democrats when one expresses an opinion different than their own. When you get right down to it, the similarities are frightening and disheartening. “How dare he have an opinion of his own!”
As far as I’m concerned, he can have any opinion he wants, question is, who cares? Is he famous? Yes. Does that make him smart or well informed? No. I have the same problem with celebrities, particularly actors. Who cares what some dude that puts on makeup and pretends for a living thinks?
well, Trump is a NY republican..
the “New York” is were the problem is..
as an independent voter… RFK says some things right…
(i did vote for Ronald Regan in 1984.. and Ross Perot (sorry Bush Sr)
and Trump last time.. even though my vote didn’t count… I live in a far left Nazi state )… they don’t own the land mass, just the groupies along the west coast of Oregon..
i wish the answer was crystal clear.. not convinced it is… Although Kamel-toe and Creepy Joe is a definite NO go.
One thing I will disagree with Four Boxes Diner on is that I don’t see the bump stock ban as a strategic move by Trump. He was bowing to pressure, and he did so in an unconstitutional fashion. Yes, it was struck down by SCOTUS, but there’s no way that Trump was playing 4D Underwater Chess with that move. It was a fail on his part, plain and simple.
That being said: there’s no such thing as a perfect candidate, and I’ll take my chances with Trump over Harris any day of the week.
Whether or not he is “smart” or “well informed”, at least we know that he can see the light. Recanting his prior statement says a lot about his character. Anyone can make a “mistake” by being “uninformed” or illogical. The true test of intelligence played out here in that he could and did change his opinion, AND, he stated that publicly. Kudos to him and I hope others can take his lead.
We’re not voting our way out of this.
“Take the guns, and take them early.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxgybgEKHHI
Never stand in the center and watch them form a circle around you,never never ever.
Mark Smith does not speak for me when he postulates that “Strategic Retreats for Long-Term Gains” is acceptable.
That is a paved 4-lane to Hell.
HLB
It’s not just SCOTUS pick we should be concerned about. There were numerous vacancies in federal courts that Trump filled. St. Benitez out here in Kommiefornia is getting up there in years. It would be nice is he were replaced by someone even half as well versed in the constitution as him.