USA Today laments:
Gun rights activists have taken their national victories not as a reason to pat themselves on the back, but as reason to push forward with an agenda that ranges from radical to idiotic.Proof of these "radical" and "idiotic" agenda items? Wyoming's recent move to what is becoming known as "Constitutional Carry," North Dakota's approval of "parking lot" legislation that makes it illegal for an employer to take away an employee's right to have his self-defense firearm in their car or truck, and Pennsylvania's move to join other states to enact “stand your ground” legislation.
What we are seeing is a systematic campaign for a doctrine of guns anywhere, anytime and in the hands of just about anyone, without consequence for irresponsible actions. When the gun lobby first started winning concealed carry laws about two decades ago, it said that vigorous background checks and permitting procedures should be maintained, and that some places should remain gun-free. Having won such laws in most states, it is now working to undo those parameters.
But it has been at the state and local level where most anti-rights legislation has been enacted over the years so it is only natural that they would become the focus of the pro-rights community and where the most vigorous action would occur. Further, no one is advocating that those who are not supposed to possess firearms (criminals, those with mental disabilities) should now have access to them.
USA Today thinks regaining our lost rights is bad for public safety and infringes on the rights of those who have no desire to own firearms. Dr. John Lott has research that shows more guns equal less crime. Maybe the USA today editors should ask those non-gun owning folks for which they think they speak if they prefer more crime.
USA Today thinks regaining our lost rights is bad for public safety and infringes on the rights of those who have no desire to own firearms. Dr. John Lott has research that shows more guns equal less crime. Maybe the USA today editors should ask those non-gun owning folks for which they think they speak if they prefer more crime.
Posts
1 comment:
David is correct that the anti-rights efforts are coming at the state and local level.
While we believe our opponents are off track in their thinking about the Constitution, they are, generally, not off track in their methods of approaching elected officials close to home. And we should continue to share that thinking.
It is not only effective, it is less costly. It allows a greater sense of community to assemble like-minded local people toward a common issue critical to the citizens of the Commonwealth. But most importantly, in my opinion, is it reinforces energy behind the “Original Intent”. Our country was founded on the recognition that Washington’s governance would be tightly limited to only those enumerated powers identified in the Constitution. EVERYTHING ELSE would be left to the states and the People to determine.
While this creates a state-centric front line in our efforts to protect the Second Amendment, it also supports other efforts relative to issues that so many of us share; reducing government overreach, overregulation and overspending and taxation, competitive business climate, an eager, well-trained educated local workforce.
Many states are seeing an exodus of citizens who have said, “Enough!” Our insistence on personal liberties and freedoms, self determination and self reliance will attract others who share our vision. There is real strength in those numbers.
Post a Comment