Today normal life has suddenly become a lot more complicated and perhaps dangerous with the coronavirus threat, or [...]]]>
Today normal life has suddenly become a lot more complicated and perhaps dangerous with the coronavirus threat, or at least that’s how many Americans must feel, as shown by increased numbers of firearms sales in recent days.
Tucker Carlson noticed the trend and surmised that many Americans must not feel safe for so many newbies to be buying guns.
He also observed that State Department continued to resettle refugees from corona-infected nations through this week, showing how old preferences live on.
SPARE AUDIO:
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: Across the country, Americans are literally the lining up outside gun stores ahead of what could be some kind of shutdown.
UNIDENTIFIED LOS ANGELES REPORTER: Toilet paper, hand sanitizer and now gun supplies. Lines weave around gun shops.
UNIDENTIFIED GUN SHOPPER: I’ve been robbed before, you know, who says that the people aren’t going to start robbing for food, and that’s scary.
ANOTHER GUN SHOPPER: When you feel uncertainty about your security, you want to do something about it.
COLORADO REPORTER: Many of them are first-time firearm owners who are learning how to use a weapon to protect themselves and their families.
ARIZONA REPORTER: Coronavirus uncertainty has led to a spike of guns and ammo sales at his store.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They sold upwards of 40 to 50 guns yesterday alone.
ARIZONA REPORTER: That is a big uptick from a typical day.
NEW YORK STATE REPORTER: Owner Andrew Chernoff says sales are soaring as fears of coronavirus continue to climb.
GUN STORE OWNER ANDREW CHERNOFF: We got in a bunch of guns, I’m sure by the end of the day, we will be out of guns again. We are now seeing a lot of first time gun buyers who never would have thought to buy a gun before who are now saying I need to have something to protect myself.
CARLSON: And just to be clear, a lot of these people who have never owned a gun before, if the public believes their leaders would protect them, they wouldn’t be buying guns; but they know their leaders won’t, and so they are, and this infuriates Democrats.
In New York, Nassau County Executive Laura Curran attacked people for trying to protect themselves amid this uncertainty.
LAURA CURRAN, D-NASSAU COUNTY EXECUTIVE: Guns are not going to fight the virus. What will fight the virus is people staying home and isolating themselves and not having birthday parties and weddings and clustering together in big groups.
CARLSON: Arrogant, stupid, totally uneducated, nasty. That’s the face of it right there — Laura Curran.
Tim Schmidt is President of the U.S. Concealed Carry Association. He joins us tonight. Tim, thanks so much for coming on. I mean, it does seem pretty clear that when you trust that the authorities are going to keep you safe, you’re probably not fixated on protecting yourself because you don’t have to be. People know that they need to protect themselves, correct?
TIM SCHMIDT, PRESIDENT, U.S. CONCEALED CARRY ASSOCIATION: Of course, Tucker, and as you’re talking about before, our law enforcement professionals and police departments, they had their hands full before the coronavirus, and so now, it’s only going to be worse.
Now more than ever, people need to understand that they need to be their family’s first line of defense.
CARLSON: Well, of course, and by the way, I thought there was a constitutional right guaranteeing that, and if there was ever a moment to invoke it, it’s now. So how can leaders lead? Air quotes around it, leaders like Laura Curran, the one we just saw right there from Nassau County, New York, how can she — I mean, how can any of them get in the way of your constitutional right to protect yourself?
SCHMIDT: Well, you’re right. They shouldn’t be, and honestly, I applaud all of these brand new people that are buying guns, but Tucker, what I’m about to say is going to become a little bit of a shock to you, especially coming from a guy like me, and that is that that so many — 90 percent of these brand new people buying guns have never owned guns before. They’ve probably never even touched a gun.
And that means they’re untrained. Now, don’t get me wrong, Tucker, I personally think that firearm ownership is a natural born right of free people. But with that, right, comes a tremendous responsibility and that responsibility is to be trained.
And so I will make a request right now if you’re watching this and you just bought a gun for self-defense, get training. Get training as fast as you can, whether it’s in person or even online, it will help you be a better defender, which we all know you’re going to have to be.
CARLSON: I think that’s really wise advice and anyone who has hunted a lot or has had guns, you know, they tend to have real respect for firearms because they’re dangerous tools. Thanks so much for that. Tim, we appreciate you coming on tonight.
SCHMIDT: My pleasure, Tucker.
CARLSON: Well around the world, thanks to this pandemic, countries are rediscovering the value of borders. Canada, believe it or not, has announced is closing itself off from foreigners. Obviously, it’s time we did the same.
And yet remarkably, until this very afternoon, the United States was still resettling refugees in the country, many of them from countries battling coronavirus outbreak. Let’s repeat that. Until this afternoon, our State Department was resettling refugees in your neighborhood from countries with virus outbreaks.
To stop a virus, while millions of Americans can’t go outside, the State Department was still dropping outsiders, foreign nationals into their communities. We’re glad the Trump administration put a stop to that. Thank God, at least for now.
Tucker Carlson is sure that [...]]]>
Tucker Carlson is sure that Old Joe meant 150 thousand — but the goof shows how ragged things are getting among the 2020 Democrats as Super Tuesday looms. The urge is to cite the most extreme statistic — even a wrong one — as a quote that will show up on the news the next day.
Plus, gun grabbing is practically a religion among the left. They cannot imagine armed citizens in a free country — where’s the power and control in that?
Democrats really do have a different idea of how this nation should be run — with open borders and no way to defend yourself from illegal alien criminals.
Meanwhile, millions of Americans understand that the Second Amendment is vital to keeping the First and will not give up their rights as citizens.
The man below was one of the thousands of Second Amendment supporters who rallied in support of firearm possession in Richmond Virginia on January 20.
Tucker Carlson could not let the gun gaffe go without a discussion of how horrible the Democrats all are on the Second Amendment.
(Spare video here.)
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: Well during the Democratic debate last night, Joe Biden made a remarkable claim about the level of gun violence in this country. Watch:
JOE BIDEN: A hundred and fifty million people have been killed since 2007 when Bernie voted to exempt the gun manufacturers from liability, more than all the wars, including Vietnam, from that point on.
CARLSON: Vietnam? More than that? A hundred and fifty million. That’s almost half the country, dead in 10 years. That’s a lot of empty buildings.
Presumably Biden meant to say 150,000. That’s roughly the number of gun homicides in this country during that period. But Democrats are doing their best to drive that number up. How? By attacking police and letting criminals — real criminals — go free.
Instead of fighting gun violence by fighting actual criminals who are trying to destroy the NRA and take guns from people who didn’t vote for them with assault weapons ban.
Do assault weapons bans work? Well, there’s just been a big study on this question from Johns Hopkins, the Party of Science is ignoring it, but the answer is no. They don’t work. Not that they’ll stop trying to push somebody in.
Colion Noir is a Second Amendment advocate. He joins us tonight. Thanks so much for coming on. Have you noticed there seems to be a connection between the vehemence of gun control advocates and their lack of knowledge about firearms?
I mean, some of these people — Biden is a perfect example — don’t know what end the round comes out of. They don’t know what a muzzle is. And yet they’re sort of posing as experts. Am I imagining this?
COLION NOIR: No, you’re not imagining. It is exactly what they’re doing. And to me, that’s the most disheartening aspect of this. We’re talking about one of the most important constitutional rights in this country. But yet these individuals who are calling themselves leaders don’t know the first thing about the subject they’re talking about.
They just get their talking points, get in front of the camera, and then spew a bunch of misinformation to millions of people, and then the people believe it.
CARLSON: So what’s interesting is that the same people who lecture you constantly about science and climate change and look at the data, essentially ignore the data when it conflicts with their social engineering.
So Johns Hopkins, which I think is a legitimate institution, or was anyway, has a new study showing that assault weapons bans do not or there’s no evidence to show that they do reduce mass shootings.
So this would — and a lot of studies have shown, this including the Federal government’s own study, during the Clinton administration. Why is this not kind of death for assault weapons bans, they don’t work. So why are we still pushing them?
NOIR: Well, because of the agenda. At the end of the day, and I always go back to this point, because it’s their overall goal, which is control. They don’t really care about what the facts actually say.
What they want is to restrict the Second Amendment into oblivion. That’s the goal. And at this point in time, from what we’ve seen from all of the candidates that have been on stage talking about the Second Amendment and gun control, so forth and so on, and people talking about confiscating weapons.
At this point, we should all understand that. That they have an agenda to restrict the Second Amendment into oblivion. This isn’t about saving lives. This isn’t about trying to find a balance and having a conversation. Because if it was, they wouldn’t be talking about how they beat or destroy the NRA.
They’d be talking about, okay, well, how do we balance protecting people’s rights while trying to, you know, save lives in some manner that makes sense and that’s actually plausible, without taking away people’s constitutional rights, that as far as I’m concerned, I’m not willing to give up for the sake of saying, you know, what, I do feel a little bit safer, when I’m not actually safer.
And so that’s the problem with this conversation as a whole. They really don’t care. What they care about is gaining control.
CARLSON: Yes, controlling the population. Armed populations are to be controlled, and by the way, if they cared about gun violence, they would focus their efforts in places where gun violence is the biggest problem, but of course, they’re against that. It tells you everything.
Colion Noir, it’s great to see you.
NOIR: Absolutely.
CARLSON: No, please, finish up. Put a bow on it.
NOIR: Got you. So for them, it’s too multifaceted for them. They don’t actually want to do work. They don’t want to roll the sleeves up and get the job done, because when you talk about the places that have the most gun violence, it’s a socioeconomic issue. It’s not a gun issue.
Because if it were a gun issue, we’d see this violence widespread across the country. We don’t. It’s concentrated in very specific areas. And there’s a pattern to all of these areas that are not being addressed.
But that would require them to actually care and actually do work.
CARLSON: No, it’s true.
NOIR: They’ll go into these places, and they’ll say, oh, we’ll give you gun control and then leave and never show up again after election.
CARLSON: If someone’s trying to make you powerless and helpless, you should be nervous. That’s a sign — that’s not a good sign. I don’t think at all.
NOIR: It’s not a good sign.
CARLSON: Colion, great to see you. Thank you for that.
It’s amazing how little political leaders know about the people over whom they preside. Or maybe elites just pretend to be ignoramuses so they can display their power and perhaps stir up some trouble in the process.
Clearly, armed Americans defend their own or someone else’s safety all the time. Monday’s Washington Times had a front page photo of Stephen Willeford who used his firearm to chase off a shooter from a Texas church in 2017.
Here’s Laura Ingraham chatting with an agreeable Virginia sheriff about the event and issue:
]]>LAURA INGRAHAM: Today thousands of law-abiding gun owners rallied at Virginia’s capital to oppose the gun-grabbing policies of Democrats in the state house. The media did their job, and best job, to smear those at the rally as gun toting racists. So we sent Fox’s own Griff Jenkins to Richmond to give you the real story.
CROWD: USA! USA! USA!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: None of us out here want to cause violence at all. We all just want peace. But I would love to have the ability to protect myself, my family, and everyone else around me.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I heard a lot about violence. There’s really no violence happening out here.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They want to have universal background checks, which we know is a first step toward gun registration, which we don’t need. Target criminals and violations of law-abiding criminals whether it’s weapons or other things, don’t target the law-abiding citizens.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It all starts with the Second Amendment. Once they take that from you than it’s one right after another.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The rest of Virginia if you look at the Second Amendment sanctuary city movement and counties, we don’t want gun control. We’re not going to comply with your gun control.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You would have a better chance of laying in the creek and kissing a copperhead than you would getting the firearms from Virginians.
INGRAHAM: I want to hang out with all those people; they look really fun. Joining me now is someone who was at that rally, Richard Vaughan, sheriff of Grayson County Virginia.
Sheriff, we really appreciate your being with us tonight. I know it wasn’t easy, so thanks so much. What is going to happen in your county if the bills that the Virginia Democrats are pushing go into effect?
SHERIFF RICHARD VAUGHAN: Grayson County is a Second Amendment sanctuary, and if these bills are passed as proposed, I know they can still make some changes on this bill. But if they are passed as proposed, they will not be enforced in Grayson County because they are unconstitutional. We took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Virginia, and that’s what we’re going to do. We are not going to arrest law-abiding citizens for having guns.
INGRAHAM: I pressed one of the State Democrat gun control advocates who serves now in the statehouse last week; he insisted, sheriff, that guns that are in possession of people now would be grandfathered in, and they wouldn’t be forced to be turned over, you wouldn’t have to turn your guns over. But that is not what I understand. There is a lot of loosey-goosey language in this legislation that would mean you become a felon if you own a particular type of semi-automatic weapon that has a big enough magazine in it, 10, more than 10, you are in big trouble.
VAUGHAN: Absolutely, Senate Bill 16 that died in the committee last week thankfully, but then there’s also a House bill to the same effect that could gun grab semi-automatic weapons like the AR-15 which is an Armalite rifle. That is nothing but a .22 caliber rifle, it’s not much more than a squirrel gun. So these high-capacity magazines, why are we telling homeowners that they can’t have a high-capacity magazine there to defend themselves in these situations? We hear of cases all the time where we have home intruders coming into residences, and they need a high-capacity magazine to be able to defend themselves. A lot of people that are disabled have guns in the home and have to defend themselves.
INGRAHAM: Sheriff, we sent our Griff Jenkins down there, and he was all through the crowd today. These are people from all parts of the state, they were men, women, ethnically diverse, racially diverse, people who, most of them were carrying their weapons because they were outside the perimeter, but Northam didn’t allow anyone to go on the property near the capital with their firearm. And also, you can see the crowd is much more representative in the overhead shot there.
And then they didn’t allow drones. I didn’t understand that. The FAA said no drones could be flown overhead either, I guess to take pictures? I don’t even understand that. It seems like they are curtailing everybody’s rights going into this rally, almost hoping to tick people off to spark some kind of unrest, but that never happened.
VAUGHAN: Absolutely. It definitely was not a state of emergency. I spent several hours in the crowd in uniform with two of my deputies and some of my constituents. We met some of the best people in the country. We ate breakfast this morning with a gentleman from Houston who drove 19 hours just to be here in Virginia to help us protect our Second Amendment rights. We met people from Florida, Pennsylvania, militia groups, people carrying Armalite rifles, everybody there was armed. And they estimated nearly 60,000 people, yet there wasn’t a single person even arrested.
And the governor made the statement today that law enforcement did a great job of de-escalating the crowd. And I agree, law enforcement did do a great job, but there was no de-escalation needed. Everybody we met there came up to us, shook our hands, and thanked us for being there and standing up for their Second Amendment rights.
INGRAHAM: Sheriff, compare that to the Antifa rallies, what happens at those things, right? You’ve got people with clubs, and cement they’re throwing at people, and trash everywhere, and assaulting people, and the media does a big collective yawn. You guys show up, a huge rally for the Second Amendment, no problems, no trash, no assaults, and you get the sense the media is unhappy that this happened. They are unhappy it didn’t play up to their stereotype.
Sheriff, we are with you all the way. Stay safe out there. Thank you for what you do for the Commonwealth of Virginia, and for the cause of the Second Amendment. Thank you, sir.
Actually, if I were a public conservative in Washington I would have weaponed up immediately after the [...]]]>
Actually, if I were a public conservative in Washington I would have weaponed up immediately after the attempted mass murder that nearly killed Republican Congressman Steve Scalise during a GOP team baseball practice. Only the presence of Scalise’s security detail because he is the House Majority Whip prevented a bloodbath of dead Republicans.
In fact, Rep. Chris Collins (R-NY) said after the shooting that he would carry a concealed weapon, and it’s likely others do too.
It’s disturbing that the left has whipped itself into such extreme agitation with its Trump Derangement Syndrome that some appear on the verge of serious violence. With Hillary Clinton as their guide, some Democrats remain in denial about Donald Trump being president and elected fair and square. It’s ugly to watch, and we have no way to know how far the refusal to accept President Trump as legitimate will go.
Below, the Red Hen restaurant in Lexington, Virginia, where the owner forced Trump Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and her family to leave for being part of the administration. Perhaps the proprietor should rename her restaurant the Red Guard Cafe, after the marauding Chinese commie gangs of the 1960s for honesty in advertising.
So it’s reasonable for public Republicans to think about armed self-defense.
Trump aides urged to get a gun, Washington Examiner, by Paul Bedard, June 25, 2018
Facing a new wave of potentially dangerous threats, called for by a top Democratic lawmaker, legal and gun experts are calling on top Trump aides to get their concealed carry permit and back it up with a pistol.
“There are simply not enough police in D.C. or Virginia or Maryland to protect all Trump officials at their homes and when they go out to restaurants. Getting a concealed handgun permit would be helpful to protect themselves and their family,” said John R. Lott Jr., president of the influential Crime Prevention Research Center.
“High level officials in the Trump administration, especially if their faces are likely to be recognized by many in the public as a result of appearances on TV, might want to consider applying for a license to carry a concealed weapon in the District of Columbia, and/or other states they frequent, in view of the call by Rep. Maxine Waters for the public to ‘absolutely harass’ these officials in public places, and other recent events indicating the increased danger they are in,” added public interest law professor John Banzhaf.
Trump admin officials can get DC gun carry permits to defend themselves from the crazies who obey Maxine Walters. https://t.co/CBgTI1dyWn
— Emily Miller (@EmilyMiller) June 25, 2018
And Emily Miller, who wrote a book about the difficult process getting a gun permit in “Emily Gets Her Gun,” tweeted, “Trump admin officials can get DC gun carry permits to defend themselves from the crazies who obey Maxine Walters.”
Mark Smith, author of #Duped: How the Anti-gun Lobby Exploits the Parkland School Shooting – and How Gun Owners Can Fight Back, added, “While I do not think Maxine Waters wishes violence on anyone including on Trump supporters, the reality is her rhetoric that liberals should ‘harass’ Trump supporters could easily be misconstrued by someone predisposed to criminal violence as encouragement to commit violence on Trump supporters and staff.”
“High level officials in the Trump administration might want to apply for a license to carry a concealed weapon, in view of the call by Rep. Maxine Waters to ‘absolutely harass’ them in public places,” added public interest law professor John Banzhaf. GWUhttps://t.co/iTwJSoCJLv pic.twitter.com/BljX5sRfoF
— John Banzhaf (@ProfBanzhaf) June 25, 2018
(Continues)
Interestingly, citizens including Trump staffers can own firearms for their personal protection in part because of the important Heller decision by the Supreme Court in 2008.
At CPAC last February, Emily Miller interviewed Dick Heller, the man who persevered to get his Second Amendment rights.
]]>Meanwhile in the UK, there is no right for a citizen to own a firearm. But that doesn’t stop the bad guys from committing murder and mayhem.
[...]]]>Meanwhile in the UK, there is no right for a citizen to own a firearm. But that doesn’t stop the bad guys from committing murder and mayhem.
Keep in mind the because of massive immigration, London is no longer majority white. So the many tribes of newbies act within an atmosphere of extreme diversity which we are told daily is a strength. Yet violent crime is on an upswing.
Here are a few headlines from the last week denoting crime among the diverse residents of London — apparently the determined criminals somehow make do with knives:
● London gang crime: no one is safe from knives in my bleak and furious city, Times of London, February 25, 2018
● Police abandoned us, say Somalis in wake of London knife killings, The Guardian, February 24
● ‘I’m wounded’: Last words of student murdered in Samurai sword ‘revenge attack’ less than a mile from where a teenager was stabbed to death – as mother says Somalis walk the streets with ‘knives used for killing cattle’, Daily Mail, February 21
● UK knife crime takes toll on black teenagers, Al Jazeera, February 24
Below, a London resident does his shopping with a substantial blade in hand.
Here’s an Al Jazeera report titled “London sees a rise in knife crimes”:
]]>A couple of particularly affecting pro-gun statements come from the European immigrant who lived in Nazi-occupied Greece and the older black woman who bought a gun to keep [...]]]>
A couple of particularly affecting pro-gun statements come from the European immigrant who lived in Nazi-occupied Greece and the older black woman who bought a gun to keep safe in her gang-infested apartment complex.
The most recent is from Benghazi defender, Mark “Oz” Geist. It’s inspiring to hear a genuine hero talk about American courage:
Transcript
I know the truth about Benghazi.
I was there, fighting alongside five Americans, who were all raised to believe that if you have a chance to save someone’s life and you don’t try, that’s more criminal than anything else. So we fought for 13 hours, and we saved lives. But we are not unique.
We are no different than the Americans who ran back into those crumbling New York towers, or the Americans who tackled the armed terrorists on that French train, or the many faceless, nameless Americans who every day risk their lives for perfect strangers trapped in burning cars or dangerous waters—because if they didn’t, no one would.
Where was that courage among the politicians who had the power to make a difference during those 13 hours in Benghazi?
I am the National Rifle Association of America, and I am Freedom’s Safest Place.
People who care about the Second Amendment should pay attention to immigration-fueled demographic change in this country, because hispanics are gun grabbers at heart, as Pew pollsters discovered in a 2014 survey:
Pew Hispanic: Gun Rights and Restrictions
An early 2014 Pew Research Center survey asked U.S. adults what is more important — protecting the right of Americans to own guns or controlling gun ownership (Pew Research Center, 2014d). Hispanic registered voters nationally say they prefer gun control over the rights of owners by a margin of 62%-to-36%, as do black registered voters by a margin of 71%-to-26%, according to the survey. By contrast, white registered voters choose gun owners’ rights over gun control by a margin of 59%-to-39%.
Included in the roughly six-in-ten Hispanic registered voters who say they prefer gun control are 44% who say that most Americans should be able to own guns if certain limits are in place and 18% who say only law enforcement and security personnel should be able to own guns. Also included among the 36% of Hispanic registered voters who think protecting gun rights is a bigger priority are 27% who favor some restrictions on gun ownership and just 9% who favor no such restrictions.
Looking across all Hispanics regardless of their voter registration status or eligibility, 82% of foreign-born Hispanics think controlling gun ownership is more important than protecting gun ownership rights, compared with 59% of Hispanics born in the U.S. who say the same.
A recent Pew Research Center analysis found that two-in-ten Hispanics say they have a gun, rifle or pistol in their home (Morin, 2014). This is similar to the share of blacks who say this (19%), but whites are twice as likely (41%) to say they have a gun in their home. According to a Pew Research analysis of crime rates in the U.S., 17% of gun homicide victims were Hispanic, proportionate to their 16% share of the U.S. population in 2010. By contrast, blacks make up 55% of gun homicide victims, but just 13% of the U.S. population, while whites make up 25% of victims and 65% of the population (Cohn et. al., 2013).
The gun grabber thing is of a piece with hispanic culture that comes from the national backgrounds of many, where quite a few of their home countries are at least semi-socialist: they like their government to be big, not limited. We shouldn’t be surprised, since hispanics come for the dollars, not liberty.
Unfortunately for America, their anti-gun beliefs remain unfazed by living in a free nation, because they do not understand — or care — how guns are a foundational part of freedom here.
]]>Americans Prefer Living in Neighborhoods With Guns, Rasmussen Reports, June 12, 2015
American Voters overwhelming prefer living in a [...]]]>
Americans Prefer Living in Neighborhoods With Guns, Rasmussen Reports, June 12, 2015
American Voters overwhelming prefer living in a neighborhood where they have the option of owning a gun than to live where nobody is allowed to be armed.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 22% of Likely U.S. Voters would feel safer living in a neighborhood where nobody was allowed to own a gun over one where they could have a gun for their own protection. Sixty-eight percent (68%) would feel safer in a neighborhood where guns are allowed, while 10% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
It should be borne in mind that many immigrant residents of the United States do not share an appreciation for armed self-defense. Hispanics in particular prefer the gun-grabber ideology of liberals, as shown by an October 2014 Pew Hispanic report “Latino Voters and the 2014 Midterm Elections.” Part of the liberal goal of a permanent Democrat majority attained through massive hispanic immigration is the destruction of the Second Amendment. Gun eradication a big item within Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of America into a country that isn’t recognizable as our traditional nation.
Chapter Two: Latino Views on Selected 2014 Ballot Measure Issues
Gun Rights and Restrictions
On November 4, two states will vote on ballot measures regarding gun rights or restrictions. In Alabama, voters will be deciding whether to amend their state constitution to explicitly allow citizens of Alabama the right to bear arms. In Washington state, voters face two competing measures: The first would restrict gun control by preventing confiscation of firearms without due process and implementing background checks for firearm sales unless a federal standard is established. The second would strengthen gun control by extending the existing requirement for background checks in purchases made from licensed dealers to all gun purchases, including gun shows, online sales and private sales.
An early 2014 Pew Research Center survey asked U.S. adults what is more important — protecting the right of Americans to own guns or controlling gun ownership (Pew Research Center, 2014d). Hispanic registered voters nationally say they prefer gun control over the rights of owners by a margin of 62%-to-36%, as do black registered voters by a margin of 71%-to-26%, according to the survey. By contrast, white registered voters choose gun owners’ rights over gun control by a margin of 59%-to-39%.
Included in the roughly six-in-ten Hispanic registered voters who say they prefer gun control are 44% who say that most Americans should be able to own guns if certain limits are in place and 18% who say only law enforcement and security personnel should be able to own guns. Also included among the 36% of Hispanic registered voters who think protecting gun rights is a bigger priority are 27% who favor some restrictions on gun ownership and just 9% who favor no such restrictions.
Looking across all Hispanics regardless of their voter registration status or eligibility,1582% of foreign-born Hispanics think controlling gun ownership is more important than protecting gun ownership rights, compared with 59% of Hispanics born in the U.S. who say the same.
A recent Pew Research Center analysis found that two-in-ten Hispanics say they have a gun, rifle or pistol in their home (Morin, 2014). This is similar to the share of blacks who say this (19%), but whites are twice as likely (41%) to say they have a gun in their home. According to a Pew Research analysis of crime rates in the U.S., 17% of gun homicide victims were Hispanic, proportionate to their 16% share of the U.S. population in 2010. By contrast, blacks make up 55% of gun homicide victims, but just 13% of the U.S. population, while whites make up 25% of victims and 65% of the population (Cohn et. al., 2013).
Do any Republicans still believe hispanics are natural conservatives? That’s a delusion at best and always was a lie. Hispanics are natural liberals, period. They prefer big government and hispanic family values include a desire for a “generous safety net” from politicians for whom they vote.
Supporters of the Second Amendment better recognize the threat to gun rights from a hispanicized America and become active in reducing diverse immigration of cultures that hate our values.
Hispanic immigrants don’t come from a firearm-positive culture like America’s, where guns are used responsibly by citizens for self-defense and as a firewall against government tyranny. Mexican cartels do like guns well enough for criminal applications, and the Mexico City Catholic church runs yearly disarmament drives to remove weapons.
Many gun rights advocates in this country have ignored the threat posed by the demographic changes forced upon the nation by elite-sponsored immigration. Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America (GOA) is an exception. In 2013, he remarked, “If you bring a whole bunch of Democrats into the country, most of them are going to vote to take away our guns and in a few years that’s exactly what would happen, so we don’t want the other problems that come with that. Just from a Second Amendment point of view, we have a dog in that fight.” (As posted online by RightWingWatch).
Pratt recently announced in an online radio show that GOA will begin to include politicians’ amnesty position as a part of their Second Amendment ratings.
]]>Gun Owners of America to score amnesty votes in politician gun ratings, Examiner, March 2, 2015
News that can help shape the political landscape of the gun rights advocacy community was broken last night on the nationally-syndicated Armed American Radio program, when Larry Pratt, Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, announced GOA will begin scoring politicians on their support or opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens.
GOA has been alone among national gun rights groups warning that a “pathway to citizenship” will provide for millions of new anti-gun voters with the electoral clout to undo all hard-won legislative and judicial gains gun owners have enjoyed in recent years. That the administration is working toward that and other agenda goals is corroborated by what Homeland Security Jeh Johnson told the United Conference of Mayors, when he maintained that “the approximately 11 million people who are in the country illegally have ‘earned the right to be citizens.’”
The danger of allowing that to happen was emphasized recently by Oregon’s Rep. Kurt Schrader, who declared immigration “will decide who is in charge of this country for the next 20 or 30 years.” Plus, Obama’s counting on that.
The discussion took place in the third hour of the program, beginning at the 45-minute mark. I was one of the panelists, along with Pratt, host Mark Walters, Neil W, McCabe of Human Events, and blogger, trainer and gun authority George “Mad Ogre” Hill. Referencing back to a guest from the second hour, Georgia Congressman Doug Collins, I regretted not being able to establish his position on joining with so-called “Republican rebels” and separating Barack Obama’s amnesty from Department of Homeland Security funding.
“I know that there are pro-gun politicians that get A-ratings and things like that, but should not amnesty also be a part of the way that these people are scored?” I asked Pratt.
“Well the answer you’re going to get from us at GOA is absolutely, it should be a part of scoring, and it’s something that we plan on including in our rating of Congress this next year, because as we’ve already discussed, if we don’t block this amnesty move now, before we get five, eight-million previously illegal aliens now voting 85 percent anti-gun Democrats, that’s the ballgame,” Pratt replied. “That’s it.
“We lose our Second Amendment, it doesn’t matter whether it’s still in the Constitution in writing or not,” he continued. “The National Archives can’t protect it from this kind of assault.”
At that point, legislative and judicial avenues will be closed, and all gun owners will need to make a decision that carries terrible personal consequences.
GOA’s decision will offer further contrast with the way political grades are assigned by the larger National Rifle Association. With NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre telling the Conservative Political Action Conference that “[T]o defend firearm freedom, we need more than just firearm freedom … One right depends on another,” with a recent NRA advertising campaign promoting the message that all rights are connected, and with NRA’s bylaws mandating the organization to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States [and] promote public safety, law and order, and the national defense,” the continued “single issue” excuse for avoiding amnesty is neither consistent nor credible.