In their own words: Revealing statists’ true “gun control” agenda

How the Supreme Court silenced the anti-Second Amendment crowd and the statists' plan to use the Court to empower them in the future. Photo: AP

HOUSTON, April 18, 2013 ― On April 9, 2013, Joe Biden stated that it was “bizarre” for Americans to believe that the federal government was going to “swoop down with Special Forces folks and gather up every gun in America.”

Condescension and name calling aside, Biden’s comments, and those of other statists prior to the landmark Supreme Court decision in the District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 case in 2008 strongly suggest that it would be “bizarre” not to be concerned about the statists’ plan to strip law abiding citizens of our Second Amendment rights.

The Heller and McDonald decisions:

The Heller decision in 2008 clarified that the Second Amendment does provide for an individual right to bear arms. This ruling was not extended to the states, though, because the case originated in the federally controlled District of Columbia.


SEE RELATED: Fighting violence, fighting gun control


Gun-rights opponents argued that the only thing guaranteed by the Second Amendment was the right of each of the states to provide for its own militia. This was the argument the lawyers for the District of Columbia in the Heller case made, but the statists jumped the shark and their agenda was defeated.

McDonald v. Chicago 561 U.S. 3025, decided in 2010, cleared up the confusion and applied the Heller decision to the states.


SEE RELATED: The cops are a dangerous replacement for private gun ownership


Both cases were decided by 5-4 margins, meaning that the statists needed just one more justice to abandon the Constitution, along with the four liberal Justices, in order to completely rewrite American history and the Constitution itself. The decision was, however, a devastating blow to their agenda.

Prior to these decisions, Biden and other statists were much more open and honest about their intentions regarding their desire to strip law abiding Americans of our right to keep and bear arms. Today, they know that pushing for an all-out ban on guns is a political loser, but this does not mean they have given up on their aspiration to neuter the Second Amendment.  

In their own words:

The following is a small collection of quotes from some of the most powerful individuals pushing for “common sense gun control” right now:

Then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE), in an interview with the AP on 11/18/93 said, “Banning guns is an idea whose time has come.”  

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, (D-CA), who was the sponsor of both the 1994 assault weapons ban and is the sponsor of the new assault weapons ban bill being debated today said in an interview with CBS-TV’s “60 minutes” on February 5, 1995, “if I could’ve gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America turn them all in, I would’ve done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here.” 

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), then in the House of Representatives, in a statement before the House Subcommittee on Crime on April 5, 1995 stated, “Like flat earth fanatics, Second Amendment fanatics just don’t get it… The Second Amendment is not absolute. It does not guarantee the mythical individual right to bear arms we will hear argued for today.”  

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), in a Senate Democratic Policy Committee Hearing on May 15, 2000 said, “Let’s take all the handguns we have in America, put them on a couple of old rusted ships, take them out in the middle of the ocean and sink them, that would be the best thing to do.” 

President Obama’s views:

President Obama, one of the best pure politicians of our generation, has been more subtle with his words in regards to “gun control” because it is not a political winner for him, but he hasn’t been so subtle in his actions.

According to Politico, in 1996, when Obama was running for a state senate seat in Illinois, a state voter group asked him to fill out a questionnaire. One of the questions was simply, “Do you support state legislation to … ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns?” President Obama answered, “Yes.“ 

Additionally, in 2004, as a state senator in Illinois, Obama opposed legislation providing an exception to handgun restrictions if the weapon was used in the defense of one’s home. Prior to the Heller and McDonald decisions, Chicago had one of the strictest gun control laws in the country, and in fact, it was Chicago’s law that was successfully challenged in the McDonald case. Obama apparently lined up well to the left of the mainstream, as the Illinois senate consisted of 32 Democrats and 26 Republicans but the bill passed with a margin large enough to override then-Gov. (and now convict) Rod Blagojevich’s veto. 

Finally, Obama was invited to sign an amicus brief in the Heller decision supporting the individual right to keep and bear arms and he declined to do so

“This is just the beginning.”:

On March 27, 2013 Joe Biden said that these gun measures being debated right now are just the beginning. He is correct on this point. The statists’ blueprint to strip the Second Amendment of law abiding Americans’ individual right to bear arms was severely deterred with the Heller and McDonald decisions, but with Chief Justice John Roberts’ about-face on Obamacare due to the political pressure instituted by the Obama Administration, new life has been breathed into the statists’ old plans.

The ruling class’s agenda is to initiate a full court political press on the Supreme Court, in the hopes that when one of these newly passed state laws that clearly violates the Second Amendment (see Connecticut, New York or Colorado) makes it up to the Supreme Court, either one of two things will happen: Chief Justice Roberts will again fold under the political pressure and overturn the Heller decision with the four liberal justices in tow; or by the time the case makes it to the Supreme Court, one more anti-Constitution justice will have been appointed so the Court will rubberstamp any and all of the statist agenda (See New Deal cases of the 1930s).

After Heller is overturned, the statists will wait until the next horrific mass killing like Newtown, and will politically pounce on the opportunity with the hopes that by that time the American people will hand over our Second Amendment rights under the guise of “safety.”

If that day comes, that will signal the beginning of the end of this great “Shining City on a Hill.” Lt. Col. Allen West, former Congressman from Florida said it best. “An armed man is a citizen. A disarmed man is a subject.”


This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

More from A Time for Choosing
 
blog comments powered by Disqus
James Richard Edwards

James R. Edwards is a medical malpractice defense attorney in Houston, Tx. He obtained a Bachelor’s degree from LSU (Geaux Tigers!) in Psychology and subsequently went on to attend the University of Houston Law Center. James became interested in politics in law school because of the consistent and oppressive disgust and revulsion shown by the staff and Professors for the Constitution and for America in general. He is a tireless advocate for federalism and minimizing the impact the federal government has on all of our lives. 

Contact James Richard Edwards

Error

Please enable pop-ups to use this feature, don't worry you can always turn them off later.

Question of the Day
Featured
Photo Galleries
Popular Threads
Powered by Disqus