“Gun lady” Dana Loesch recently appeared on “The Rubin Report” and made some compelling arguments that exposed the hypocrisy of the anti-gun community.
“A lot of people think they are anti-gun, but they’re really not. They are anti-you-having a gun,” Dana told BlazeTV host Dave Rubin.
“I always tell people, if you’re anti-gun, you shouldn’t believe in calling the police to come with their guns … you shouldn’t hire private security if you’re anti-gun … If we’re to have discussion about legitimate class warfare, I would think the idea that only people wealthy enough to hire private security to protect them, that’s incredibly classist,” she continued.
I think there’s definitely something to be said for that mentality. But I think it goes a little deeper. And Loesch alluded to it. Fundamentally, gun control advocates support infringing 2A rights because they are either (a) afraid of guns or (b) too inept to train to competently handle firearms or (c) some combination of (a) and (b).
So what happens is that because these fearful incompetents can’t defend themselves they have to outsource their personal protection to someone else. If they got money, like Michael Bloomberg, they hire private security. If they don’t, they rely on the government.
They want us to do the same because as close-minded fearful incompetents they believe that like them we are also fearful incompetents who cannot possibly learn how to safely and responsibly keep and bear arms for traditionally lawful purposes like self-defense inside and outside the home.
In their minds, gun ownership is a privilege reserved for a certain class, mainly “authority” figures like cops, armed guards, soldiers, and government agents (It’s part of the reason why they mistakenly interpret the 2A as a collective right as opposed to an individual one).
The common citizen cannot be trusted to own guns because deep down they don’t trust themselves to own guns. As Loesch observes, their cowardice is projected onto us.
What results from this mentality are laws that purportedly seek to reduce crime but effectively disarm law-abiding citizens. Perfect example is the ban on so-called “assault weapons.” Policy wonks at government institutions in both the U.S. and Canada have admitted that prohibitions on certain classes of firearms do not reduce crime!
Yet, Canada just recently enacted a sweeping ban on many popular semiautomatic rifles and, if given the chance, presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden would do the same. From JoeBiden.com, “As president, Biden will”:
- Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Federal law prevents hunters from hunting migratory game birds with more than three shells in their shotgun. That means our federal law does more to protect ducks than children. It’s wrong. Joe Biden will enact legislation to once again ban assault weapons. This time, the bans will be designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans. For example, the ban on assault weapons will be designed to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor changes that don’t limit the weapon’s lethality. While working to pass this legislation, Biden will also use his executive authority to ban the importation of assault weapons.
- Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act.
- Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities. Biden will also institute a program to buy back weapons of war currently on our streets. This will give individuals who now possess assault weapons or high-capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act.
- Reduce stockpiling of weapons. In order to reduce the stockpiling of firearms, Biden supports legislation restricting the number of firearms an individual may purchase per month to one.
The anti-gun mindset falls apart under the slightest bit of scrutiny. When the SHTF people want armed responders present, ASAP. They don’t want to find themselves in a “gun-free zone.”
It’s why millions of Americans bought firearms for the first time during the COVID-19 pandemic and thousands more took up arms when the George Floyd rioting began. They recognized that their best chance to survive, come what may, was to be armed and ready.
The reality is that if there isn’t a good guy with a gun at the scene when trouble starts that is the first call people make. Rightfully so. Armed responders save lives, be it a local cop or licensed concealed carrier.
To Loesch’s central point, only a hypocrite would be entirely dependent on the one while completely vilifying the other.