Dem. Lawmaker Advises Progressives: ‘Never, ever, say Gun Control’

Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty (D-CT) delivered an emphatic message last week to the lefties who attended an event put on by the Center for American Progress Action Fund. It was in relation to the use of the words “gun control.” Her advice? Never use them. Ever.

Rep. Esty, who was participating in a discussion on, “The Pulse Nightclub Shooting One Year Later: Community Impacts and Policy Proposals to End Violence Against LGBTQ Communities,” cogently argued that government control over any aspect of one’s life is deal-breaker in the eyes of many Americans.

“I’d never say gun control, never ever, ever say that. Do you want the government taking control of your life, anybody in this room? For my brother and his husband – they don’t want control by government of their lives, that’s not been a good thing for the LGBTQ community, much of any of us as Americans we don’t want government control of our lives,” she said.

“We want the respect and rights and privileges and responsibilities of every other American. That’s what we want, right? That’s what we want and so that’s why we really should be talking about gun safety,” Esty continued.

Aside from shifting the narrative from “gun control” to “gun safety,” the other tactical maneuver she suggested was to go after the purse strings of the nation’s gun lobby.

“I learned to shoot in an NRA course, a camp, so did my boys. Like you, I’m a believer in the Second Amendment, but there’s a big difference between that and allowing anyone, anywhere, anytime, to be packing heat when they shouldn’t – and that is really where the battle lines are now,” she said.

“So we need to make that clear distinction, so elections have consequences and it’s important to support candidates who are not beholden to the gun lobby,” Esty explained. “So we need campaign finance reform to reduce the power of money, we need to increase activation of people who support common sense.”

What’s funny is that the NRA’s power doesn’t come from its war chest (unlike Everytown for Gun Safety, which owes its whole existence to the largess of billionaire media mogul Michael Bloomberg). It comes from its five million-plus members who are actively engaged in the political process.

So, saying a candidate is beholden to that nasty, evil gun lobby is the equivalent of saying that a candidate is beholden to his or her constituents, i.e. the voters!!! Isn’t that the way our political system is supposed to work? Elected officials must keep their promises to the voters who put them in office?  Sounds about right to me.

But if there was any doubt about the money the NRA spends on candidates and lobbying, just look at what the organization spent in 2014 compared to other interest groups with memberships a fraction of the size.  The NRA is bringing up the rear in terms of dollars spent. Yet it is still widely considered one of the most, if not the most, powerful lobbying groups in The District which only goes to show that politicians support the NRA because its power comes from the people.

The long and the short of it is the NRA isn’t going away. Gun owners aren’t going away. Anti-gunners can dress up gun control any way they like. They can call it “gun safety” or “responsible solutions” or “common sense gun reform” or whatever, but we know the truth. Policy measures that restrict 2A rights are nothing more than an attempt to do what Esty knows we fear, increase government control and reduce individual freedom. Plain and simple.

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

Leave a Reply

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

  • BIGKIELBASSA June 20, 2017, 3:45 pm

    Laying sack of 💩. She says she believes in the Second Amendment ? More lies . Check her voting record . What she is really saying to her liberal tyranny supporters is : NEVER, EVER TELL THE TRUTH .

  • Beachhawk June 19, 2017, 11:52 pm

    It doesn’t matter what liberals want to call it, it’s still restrictions on your Second Amendment rights. You can put lip stick on a pig but it’s still a pig and everyone knows it’s still a pig.

  • Michael McMahon June 17, 2017, 1:28 pm

    I live in CT ; a veteran, 25 years as a cop, and 10 yrs as armed security in federal and private organizations. I was at work when the first news of Sandy Hook hit the federal agencies. The response and mantra for that horrible day was “PERCEIVED PRESENCE”. That was the idea for sending every available federal agent and state trooper ; throughout the state; with lights and sirens to the scene..SWAT teams with less than half their members were sent. The idea was “TO MAKE PEOPLE THINK THEY WERE SAFE”. A SHOW OF FORCE . This ridiculous display was orchestrated by the elected dems. in DC and in HARTFORD . It caused a bottleneck of emergency vehicles and personnel getting in the way. Another shining example of government stupidity by the liberal Democrats.
    Esty is a shining example of that mindset.Whenever possible these liberal idiots will drag the families of that tragedy out to help sell the latest new and improved plan. Under governor Malloy CT passed a series of laws making it harder; for law abiding citizens; to own firearms. The latest brilliant idea is to increase the cost of required permits. Presidents and governors have their own heavily armed security personnel . Now lawmakers will be looking for their own armed security . Esty will jump on the party bandwagon. That leaves us to defend ourselves and our families. The next time you go to any urban area with state and federal buildings look around. I mean really LOOK! These areas are armed camps, there is security personnel and cameras and equipment . If
    the Democrats are so eager to diminish our rights to be secure then let them start reducing their security measures . Let the clintons and obamas give up their secret service details . We’re all equal, right ? Until then stay vigilant . God Bless America.

  • Ringo Lapua June 17, 2017, 12:10 am

    If we banned private citizens from defending themselves with guns, do you think that we would be safe from these liberal Democrat MORONS? In China, guns ARE BANNED, so a group of politically unhappy Chinese (like American liberal progressives) on March 1, 2014, decided to attack people who did not share their viewpoint:
    BEIJING – Authorities on Sunday blamed a slashing rampage that killed 29 people and wounded 143 at a train station in southern China on separatists from the country’s far west, while local residents said government crackdowns had taken their toll on the alleged culprits. Police fatally shot four of the assailants — putting the overall death toll at 33 — and captured another after the attack late Saturday in Kunming, the capital of Yunnan province, the official Xinhua News Agency said. But authorities were searching for at least five more of the black-clad attackers.
    MORAL OF THIS STORY: If the victims of the knife attack were properly armed to defend themselves, how many would still be alive. Banning guns is not the answer, banning violent people is the answer.

  • Nemo June 16, 2017, 6:03 pm

    Look up Operation NORTHWOODS and then ask yourself if it is ‘common sense’ to trust a government to take from you your only means of defense from it when that same government had made formal plans to kill its citizens, blame the deaths on the government of a foreign country and use that as a pretext for invading that country. All a matter of historical record.

    I would be willing to bet good money that if you made a liberal aware of such a historically documented plan on the US government’s part to kill its own citizens, they would find some way to shrug it off and continue their diatribe against personal defense.

    Liberals are such fools…

  • Grant June 16, 2017, 2:16 pm

    I’m all for gun safety. Gun safety classes in all the schools would teach kids quite a bit about the proper way to handle firearms. Then we can take a class trip to a range and practice our skills. I’ll even take a day off and help chaperone the trip.

  • Jim June 16, 2017, 12:52 pm

    If my last statement gets published I might be changing it after the Liberal/Democrats set their tactics on using the ball field incident as another assault on our Constitution specifically 2A.

  • Jim June 16, 2017, 12:36 pm

    I am an avid Republican and 2A supporter, reading this article with a Democrat talking, and with “common sense”, about gun rights stuns me. Maybe this is another tactic but maybe not. I agree with her some people should not be allowed to have a gun and there should be a better way to figure this out, not because they sneezed wrong or some other knuckle head reason to control the population. Help me to educate and discuss with folks on the Constitution and our rights and privileges as American citizens.

  • Johnh June 16, 2017, 11:33 am

    ” Esty explained. “So we need campaign finance reform to reduce the power of money, we need to increase activation of people who support common sense.”
    The last part of her statement is correct. Isn’t it common sense that if you have a firearm. You have the upper hand on the bad guy breaking in to your house. If the bad guy knows you have a firearm he is less likely to go to your house.
    The Democrats and non-gun owners need to post sign in their front lawns stating that this is a gun free zone..

  • Curt Haas June 16, 2017, 10:52 am

    After the most recent events…the best Gun safety is to not allow a liberal to have one..

  • joefoam June 16, 2017, 9:57 am

    We lose 2 people per day to opioid overdoses here in AZ yet no one has taken up that issue. I don’t understand how that is largely ignored and we focus on guns.

  • Dave June 16, 2017, 9:36 am

    I’m amazed by the abilities these lefties have to talk out both sides of their mouths at the same time. It must be those forked tongues they get when they decide to serve the serpent.

  • Chained June 16, 2017, 9:24 am

    The globalists have had a long time war against freedom and our constitution and are losing patience on ridding this country of it’s liberties. We will always have this war going on until one side or the other caves and I for one will not. I care not what laws they come up with that infringe upon my ability to protect myself from tyrants to common street thugs I will not comply.

  • Dayne June 16, 2017, 9:21 am

    Etsy seems to be less nuts than many of her type, but she’s still pushing an agenda, either due to core belief disorder, bad statistics, or vocalizing what her constituents already want to hear. I would love to just throw them “universal background checks” in the hopes it would shut them up, but it won’t. They will still seek weapons bans, capacity limits, purchase limits, and more. They can’t get enough. To them, “common sense” means “nobody has a gun except my body guards.” I am certain that left up to people like Etsy, they would push until only law enforcement, the military, and the secret service can legally own firearms. How can they possibly think that’s a good thing?

  • Michael Keim June 16, 2017, 9:20 am

    Never forget this: No matter what they say, they want no one but their selected government agents to have any kind of gun. After they get them they’ll go after all other weapons. They want total control. This was the reason for the Second Amendment.

  • kris June 16, 2017, 9:17 am

    Etsy is my congresscritter and she is as big a gun-grabber as ever lived. Left to her own devices we wouldn’t be allowed to own BB guns.

  • Rick June 16, 2017, 8:56 am

    They always talk about the need to have assault weapons and why you need high capacity magazines. Why do we have autos that go 200 mph when the speed limit in this country is 75mph ?? Why dont we have speed limiters on our engine to reduce speed …..Should there be a limit of one drink next time you visit your local bar ?? Why do they continue to sell cigarettes, they kill….What about fast food, everyone knows that crap is making Americans obese…..The FBI states that everyday in this country 13 teenagers are killed in autos because of cell phones, and there doing what about this, NOTHING….Does the media talk about this? No but they about Sandy Hook. THE BOTTOM LINE IS THEY WANT YOUR GUNS……….

  • Praedor June 16, 2017, 6:54 am

    The left has now morphed into using the mantra “common sense gun control” or “common sense gun safety” AND they now say, “No one wants to take away your guns”. They then turn around and say, “No one should have, or needs, assault weapons” which translates into “We DO want to take away your guns”!

    Every time.

    • Roger Mansfield June 16, 2017, 9:09 am

      Their is no such thing as an “Assault Rifle.” There is no such thing as “Gun Violence” Assault is a behavior not a weapon and violence is simply violence. When we in the 2nd Amendment Community use those words, we are admitting to the Media that we, too, will let them put their words in our mouths.

      • JoeUSooner June 17, 2017, 11:41 am

        Roger, a minor distinction…
        There is no such thing as an “assault weapon” (that’s the mythical, anally-improvised term used by anti-gun proponents and anti-gun politicians/media members), but there actually IS an “assault rifle” (the military designation for a rifle that can be fired on full-automatic or switched – selector-operated – to fire on semi-auto). “Assault rifles” are not available to the general public without serious National Firearms Act red tape and financial cost.
        But your specific points are well-made!

  • Darryl June 16, 2017, 4:44 am

    all anyone needs to know is that if anyone talks about gun anything, that don’t believe in the 2nd right and what it really stands for, they mean to take your guns and that’s it. all their doing is trying to find a means to their end and thats to take all the guns away from everyone nothing else.

  • Mike Jackson June 14, 2017, 9:49 pm

    So I was just reading an article on the UPS shooting in California on MSN news and I have never heard of an Assault pistol. Look for this in the new round of Gun Control debates just like high capacity ammunition magazines and calling a sporting rifle an Assault Rifle. When will this stupidity end. Changing gun control to gun safety is also another semantic statement trying to get their agenda moved forward for their agenda of thinking they are the center of the universe. The Libs just keep changing names to make thins seem more scary. Why don’t they ever look at the real scare, the wacko behind the weapon. I think it is weird that they resort to weapons when they want to keep themselves safe but want the people that actually are in charge of them to wait for the police. When seconds count the police are always at least 5 min away. We need to vote all these people out of office or change the law so that we the people will not provide for their protection, they can return to being normal citizens. Hopefully, once you take the political elite off their pedestal they will realize what we all go through on a daily basis.

  • Will Drider June 13, 2017, 10:39 pm

    The term “Gun Safety” has been hijacked and bastardized. If those words roll out a lib/dem mouth it is always a reference to gun restrictions.

    If the battlelines revolve around the restricting the 2A, then they must clearly be waging a WAR to ultimately eliminate it.

    • Altoid June 16, 2017, 7:11 am

      It’s been that way for years. Back in the 70s it was “Why are you gun owners so upset. All we want is your handguns”.

      Now it’s rifles and shotguns added to their list, and they behaved as if the outright banning of all firearms was never their intention.

Send this to a friend