The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Paul Archive
Bipartisan Attacks on the Second Amendment
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The House of Representatives recently passed legislation that would expand the national background check system to require almost everyone selling firearms, including private collectors who supplement their incomes by selling firearms at gun shows, to perform background checks on the potential buyers. The bill has a section purporting to bar creation of a national firearms registry. However, the expanded background check system will require the government to compile lists of those buying and selling guns. In other words, it creates a de facto national gun registry.

Similar to the experience with other types of prohibition, making it more difficult to legally buy a gun will enhance the firearms black market. Criminals, terrorist, and even deranged mass shooters will thus have no problem obtaining firearms.

It is no coincidence that the majority of mass shootings take place in “gun-free zones,” where shooters know their targets will be unarmed. This shows that any law making it more difficult for Americans to own and carry firearms makes us less safe. If Congress really wanted to reduce the incidence of gun violence, it would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act. This law leaves children easy prey for mass shooters by mandating that public schools be “gun-free zones.”

A nationwide system of gun registration could be a step toward national gun confiscation. However, antigun bureaucrats need not go that far to use the expanded background check system to abuse the rights of gun owners. Gun owners could find themselves subject to surveillance and even harassment, such as more intensive screening by the Transportation Security Administration, because they own “too many” firearms.

Republican control of the White House and the Senate does not mean our gun rights are safe. Republicans have a long history of supporting gun control. After the 1999 Columbine shooting, many Republicans, including many who campaigned as being pro-Second Amendment, eagerly cooperated with then-President Bill Clinton on gun control. Some supposedly pro-gun Republicans also tried to pass “compromise” gun control legislation after the Sandy Hook shooting.

Neoconservative Senator Marco Rubio has introduced legislation that uses tax dollars to bribe states to adopt red flag laws. Red flag laws allow government to violate an individual’s Second Amendment rights based on nothing more than a report that the individual could become violent. Red flag laws can allow an individual’s guns to be taken away without due process simply because an estranged spouse, angry neighbor, or disgruntled coworker tells police the individual threatened him or otherwise made him feel unsafe.

President Trump has joined Rubio in wanting the government to, in Trump’s words, “take the guns first, go through due process second.” During his confirmation hearing, President Trump’s new Attorney General William Barr expressed support for red flag laws. California Senator and leading gun control advocate Dianne Feinstein has expressed interest in working with Barr to deprive gun owners of due process. It would not be surprising to see left-wing authoritarians like Feinstein work with right-wing authoritarians like Barr and Rubio on “compromise” legislation containing both a national red flag law and expanded background checks.

My years in Congress taught me that few politicians can be counted on to protect our liberties. Most politicians must be pressured to stand up for freedom by informed and involved pro-liberty citizens That is why those of us who understand the benefits of liberty must remain vigilant against any attempt to erode respect for our rights, especially the right to defend ourselves against private crime and public tyranny.

(Republished from The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, Gun Control 
Hide 9 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. We knew this was coming. It was just a matter of time. The Repubs of today are not Conservative and they haven’t been for a long time. Teddy Roosevelt was a Conservative. A hunter, fisherman and true conservationist who is responsible most of the National Parks and the ideas of the nobility of nature. This idea came about not from the common man who wanted to kill everything but from the private fishing and hunting clubs of the North East which Roosevelt belonged to. The morons of today think the average person figured this out but nothing could be further from the truth. The ecologist Garrett Hardin knew of this simplicity of the average man when he described The Law of the Commons on what would happen to nature if left to the normality of the population at large.

    Most of the Repubs today probably aren’t even sportsmen and are more likely to belong to the country club rather than a fishing or hunting club. Furthermore, there is little difference between the Repubs and the DemoRats. Today’s Repubs are nothing more than Earth Rapists Fascists owned by Corporations. That’s why they want to take your guns. They fear you! They know that along with DemoRat friends that if they keep this up some segment of the population might decide to use guns for the retaking of this country rather than hunting and there lies the rub.

    Hunting rifles and similar type weapons are not that good for sustained fighting. The barrels are not made for accuracy especially after they heat up. Also, you need extended magazines and clips that hold many rounds which they want to completely eliminate.

    Military weapons are made for sustained fighting with lots of cartridges fired again and again. They will ban these. I’m not say you can’t use hunting rifles but you are at a major disadvantage. Antifa types won’t be using too many guns. Most of them can’t hit shit. But they will be using Molotov Cocktails and similar home made bombs and this is where a military style weapon which shoots massive number of rounds in short period of time is advantage.

    An AK-47 or AR-15 style rifle is what you want and is what they want to ban. They are going to try and stop the sale of of guns between individuals all the time knowing that criminals steal, and don’t register guns anyway. The Deep State fear Americans with guns. They don’t really fear Antifa types because if you give them free stuff they will be just fine.

    The Second Amendment is not about hunting or home protection. That was understood in the early part of our history. The Second Amendment is about Protecting the First. The Deep State and their Comrads know that they can’t take control of the First Amendment until they take you guns and destroy the Second!

  2. If President Trump signs this one (if voted for by the Senate also) he is truly the lying sack of shit that I’ve begun to suspect he is.

    BTW, I’m pretty sure the instant background system in place today is not just a precursor to registration, but a hidden means of registration already. Does anyone believe that the information involved in this check is truly erased? Do you know anything about computers? There’s no way this stuff just “goes away”. Be wary.

  3. Paul says:

    I am unclear about the libertarian position on keeping and bearing arms. Would that include any type of arms — grenades and chemical weapons for example?

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    , @Biff
  4. @Paul

    Grenades were legal pre-1934 National Firearms Act which declared them to be “Destructive Devices” and thus taxed at the rate of $200 per unit. Thus the US government acknowledged grenades to be legal. For sure they are militia weapons.

    Chemical weapons? Perhaps someone could elucidate on the legalities as they would not be subject to Destructive Device regulations as long as they do not contain explosives.

    For example, a Molotiv Cocktails are considered destructive devices in the eyes of BATF, but FLAMETHROWERS are totally legal in Federal eyes as well as most states.

  5. KenH says:

    I knew it was only a matter of time before long standing Republican support for a broadly interpreted second amendment began to flag like it has on everything else and that time is now. There seems to be increasing Republican support for so called red flag laws which are not only unconstitutional but won’t reduce gun violence and will only serve to punish law abiding citizens.

    Ms. Lindsay Graham said he would hold hearings on red flag laws very soon.

    I think there’s on average 40K gun deaths a year but 60%, or 24k, are by suicide. About 80% of the rest are committed by criminals, mostly black, who obtain their weapons on the black market, via burglary and home invasion or through a straw buyer. Then most of the rest are probably self defense cases so my guess is that 500 deaths or less can be attributed to gun owners who obtained their firearms through legal channels. So deaths by legal gun owner wouldn’t even crack the top 100 causes of death and represents about .0125 of all gun deaths or not anywhere near a national emergency as crazy witch Nancy Pelosi claims.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  6. @KenH

    I think the actual definition of a “moderate Republican” is a gun controller in news media eyes.

  7. Biff says:

    grenades and chemical weapons for example?

    A Bachelors degree in Chemistry is one of the most lethal, non-nuclear weapons known to man. Lots of people have them, and more proof that it’s not the item, but the idea that can be dangerous.

  8. Article 1, Sect. 8 of the U.S. Constitution lists the 17 specific things that the federal government has control over. Nowhere in this list does the Constitution give the feds the power to control guns, healthcare, education, or, anything else, other than those 17 specific things. For the federal govt. to add anything to that list there must be an Amendment to the Constitution. This is not just my opinion. It was also the opinion of Thomas Jefferson, and, James Madison as expressed in a well known letter between the two. So, the 2nd Amendment could disappear, and, we still have the right to defend ourselves through force of arms. Make America read again !

  9. The Second Amendment is not about hunting or home protection.

    And it sure wasn’t about Negroes. At least on the thick end.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply -

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ron Paul Comments via RSS