There is no nice way to put this, so I’ll just say it: Pushing to ban bump stocks for semi-automatic rifles is an attack on the ability of the citizenry to keep and bears arms. Now, President Trump and the National Rifle Association are considering whether or not to support regulations of bump stocks.
Before you say, how is that? Let me just say that bump stocks are a part of the arms that are not defined in the Second Amendment precisely to include such weapons.
As I pointed out yesterday concerning Senator Dianne Feinstein’s ridiculous arguments about the Second Amendment being for target practice or some other nonsense, the Second Amendment applies to the people having access to the very same weapons as a standing army because that is precisely why they are needed.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The militia, which is composed to the people not a standing army, have a duty to defend and protect a free state both from enemies in our own government (domestic) and those who are foreign.
Yet, the same NRA that has sold us out time and again, along with President Donald Trump, who supported the assault weapons ban and other gun control before but said he fully supported the Second Amendment now, are considering possible regulations of bump stocks.
“Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law,” the NRA and its lobbying arm, the NRA Institute for Legislative Action, said in a joint statement.
“The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations,” read the statement, which was issued by NRA Executive Vice President and CEO Wayne LaPierre and NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox.
This is the same organization that has been selling gun owner rights down the river for decades.
Attorney Felix Bronstein recounts their history of the NRA selling out the rights of the people and the Constitution to DC politicians.
The NRA was founded in 1871 by Union veterans to “promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis” as a result of the poor marksmanship of the North during the War. The NRA’s long recorded history of promoting gun control appears to have begun with its helping to draft and promote the Uniform Firearms Act of 1930, which was adopted by 9 states. Interestingly, this NRA law was successfully challenged in courts as being unconstitutional. The NRA also supported one of the very first and most important federal gun control measures, the National Firearms Act of 1934. NRA continued its support for gun control by supporting the Federal Firearms Act of 1938. (I am using the term “gun control” as shorthand for any measures, including legislation, that would control the people by infringing upon their individual rights to keep and bear arms.)
The NRA’s support for more and more gun control continued in spite of the opposition by many of its members. That opposition resulted in a major change of leadership in 1977, with the NRA becoming a powerful advocate of the right to keep and bear arms. While the NRA has retained that image ever since, by the mid-1980s, the NRA by and large became what it remains to this today — ostensibly a gun rights champion while in practice … Well, I’ll just let the NRA tell you themselves:
“The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871.” “The truth is, NRA supports many gun laws, including federal and state laws … . NRA has also assisted in writing [both federal and state] gun laws … .”
Some of the ways the NRA promotes gun controlinclude the drafting, supporting and/or silence with respect to new gun control, supporting the continuation and even expansion of existing gun control, introduction or support of slightly less onerous alternatives to new gun control, allowing or even supporting gun control amendments to otherwise pro-gun rights legislation and other quid pro quo tactics, supporting pro-gun control candidates, and supporting other measures that expand the reach and powers of the Federal government.
These “compromises” continue to this very day. Not only is the NRA supporting a vast expansion of the Federal government’s role with respect to education and local law enforcement, it continues to support gun control while also flip–flopping.
In 1999, the NRA publicly and explicitly endorsed a number of “reasonable restrictions on gun ownership,” including the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act. What makes this particularly interesting is that the 1999 NRA endorsement of the Act came only 4 years after the Supreme Court overturned the original Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 (à la NRA’s drafting of and support for the Uniform Firearms Act of 1930 which was also struck down by the courts). (Congress, under Trent Lott and Newt Gingrich, passed the current version of the Gun-Free School Zones Act as requested by Clinton/Reno in an end run around the Supreme Court decision.) Moreover, the NRA is currently endorsing the expansion of gun control by the Federal government.
That’s not all. The White House is mulling this over too.
“We’re certainly open to that moving forward, but we want to be part of that conversation as it takes place in the coming days and weeks,” said White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.
In April, Trump stood before the NRA and declared, “The 8-year assault on your Second Amendment Freedoms has come to a crashing end.”
“The Second Amendment to our Constitution is clear,” he writes. “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed upon. Period.”
Trump then adds, “It’s been said that the Second Amendment is America’s first freedom. That’s because the Right to Keep and Bear Arms protects all our other rights. We are the only country in the world that has a Second Amendment. Protecting that freedom is imperative.”
“The Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right that belongs to all law-abiding Americans,” the paper reads. “The Constitution doesn’t create that right – it ensures that the government can’t take it away. Our Founding Fathers knew, and our Supreme Court has upheld, that the Second Amendment’s purpose is to guarantee our right to defend ourselves and our families. This is about self-defense, plain and simple.”
He does point out rightly that many mentally ill people are not necessarily violent, they just need help, and he also rightly points out that when they do engage in violence with guns, anti-gun agenda driven politicians go after law-abiding gun owners.
The final prong of his position is to do away with gun and magazine bans, enhance the national background checks system and implement a national right to carry, as well as arm our servicemen on military bases and in recruiting centers.
Trump rightly defines semi-automatic rifles, instead of calling them “assault weapons.” To be clear, Trump has previously said that he supported the assault weapons ban, which included these same guns.
Donald Trump has said he is against gun control, claims Republicans and Democrats are wrong on guns, but he is for an assault weapon ban, wants a waiting period and background checks, none of which are in the Second Amendment nor a part of the federal government’s authority.
“The government has no business dictating what types of firearms good, honest people are allowed to own,” he said. I agree so much that I would like to see him even declaring tanks as part of the Second Amendment.
So, why not a rifle with a bump stock President Trump? That’s a “type” of firearm you said DC has no business dictating that people can own.
Trump’s White House isn’t the only one talking about bump stocks.
The usual suspect RINOs are also involved, including House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI), who said he was open to a ban.
Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) backed hearings on the ban too.
Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) joined Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA) to introduce a bipartisan bill to outlaw bump stocks.
“Legislation would make crystal clear that Congress is banning all devices that allow a weapon to achieve an automatic rate of fire, regardless of how a weapon is altered. Such legislation can and will save lives, and Congress should act immediately,” said Senator Feinstein.
However, that will not apply to police departments or the secret service or those who keep watch over Capitol Hill. Are they on a battlefield that we don’t know about?
Feinstein is lying and she knows it. Banning bump stocks will not save one single life.
In fact, as we pointed out just yesterday, liberal journalist and statistician Leah Libresco came to the conclusion that no matter how many laws, bans and restrictions you place on guns, it really doesn’t effect the outcome.
And, as I’ve said before, gun control is a myth in the first place because there will never be a law that controls the human heart. As long as there are men, there will be wicked ones among us, and as long as there are, the only thing that will stop the evil man with a gun is either the Gospel of Jesus Christ or a weapon in the hand of a good man.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook and Twitter, and follow our friends at RepublicanLegion.com.
Become an insider!
Sign up for the free Freedom Outpost email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.