Bait, Switch ‘n Slither

Steve Comus

August 1, 2017 — Akin to Hercules’ attempts to annihilate the multi-headed serpent hydra at the gates of hell in Greek mythology, defeating anti-gun interests calls for a never-ending series of counter-attacks at all levels simultaneously.

Anti-gun interests, AKA, gun grabbers, never cease trying to take guns away. Rarely is there an opportunity to see how adept antis are at altering their attacks on guns as situations in their world change. Usually, it is a matter of bait, switch and slither in which carefully orchestrated single-subject deceptions are served out within the antis’ timetable, one at a time, in ways deliberately intended to obscure their overall and eventual impact.

Late in July, one arm of the anti-gun movement pushed the proposition that local control of gun laws is better than national control in an effort to pave the way for more restrictive gun laws in subversive areas throughout the land. The antis were not having success at the federal level, so they shifted gears to focus on the local level.

Almost concurrently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit blocked a District of Columbia law, reasoning that it was unconstitutional because it effectively precluded the exercise of basic gun rights by allowing officials to deny carry permits.

There it was. Concurrent proof that the reason the antis want to go the local route is that they are losing at the federal level (sometimes in court, sometimes in the legislature). And they are losing at the federal level for good reason.

In all of this bickering over what often are Lilliputian points, the basic truth goes missing: what part about “shall not be infringed” in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution don’t they understand? Oh, they understand it all right. That is why they fight so hard to make end runs around it. Deep down inside they realize that their stance has no real foundation or justification. But they also figure that if they push hard enough and lie often enough, that they will be able to bully and BS their way to victory.I’ll not get into some of the minutia involved in the detailed arguments, but rather will hit the high points.

The U.S. Constitution guarantees citizens the right to keep and bear arms. Any kind of restriction that precludes that right or the exercise of it is unconstitutional.

There are those who argue that the Second Amendment right is not absolute and that its provisions can be limited in some ways and under some circumstances.

I do not agree with that precept. But even if it is valid, restrictions cannot be both constitutional and preclude the enumerated freedom or prevent its exercise. That’s basically what the court said in its recent ruling.

As GUNPROPLUS.COM reported recently, “Michael Bloomberg is hoping to convince the GOP that local control is better than national, i.e., federal, control. Translated into gun control-speak, he’s tired of losing the national battle over gun rights with the NRA. The failure of Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns in cities across America was also unable to stop gun trafficking from southern to northern states. He then founded Everytown For Gun Safety and that fell short. He then discovered Moms Demand Action For Gun Sense In America which produced only marginally minimal success. But apparently California is where he intends to strike the mother lode.”

Concurrently, NBC NEWS.COM reported: “A federal appeals court has blocked a District of Columbia law that makes it difficult for gun owners to get concealed carry permits. A divided three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled Tuesday that the law requiring people to show “good reason to fear injury” or another “proper reason” to carry a weapon infringes on residents’ Second Amendment rights. D.C. officials can ask the full appeals court to review the ruling. Despite the court’s ruling, D.C. will uphold the law for now, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser said….

“This decision is the latest in a long-running tussle over the city’s gun laws. In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the city’s ban on handguns, leading the city to rewrite its gun laws. City law now requires residents to register guns kept at their homes or businesses; more than 16,500 guns were registered as of September, police told the Associated Press then. Anyone who wants to carry a weapon outside the home needs a separate concealed carry license. The police department said in September that 89 people had been granted concealed carry permits and 374 had been denied.”

Where all of this takes us is full circle around the daisy wheel, wherein local government tramples on the rights of gun owners until the feds (in this case a federal court) stop them. Once stopped, what do the antis do? They go back to the locals, asking for even more punitive laws, which are destined to be struck down later on at the federal level. Around and around they go, and where they stop, we all know: the antis stop at nothing.

All of this is so unnecessary, because the answer relative to the Second Amendment is obvious: The right was established at the federal level, and that is where it belongs.

There is nothing in the Second Amendment that suggests that it applies overall except locally where subversives want something else. Simply put, there are no exceptions.

Bottom line: the Constitution doesn’t allow for subversion of itself. It is what it is. Plain and simple.

Leave a Reply

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

Download
Our Mobile App

and get our latest news and featured videos instantly

Download Now