Radical Left’s Four-Prong Strategy For Destroying 2A: Step-One More Gun Bans

Opinion
First Prong: Institute New Bans On Semiautomatic Weapons, Ammunition Magazines, And Other Gun Components And Gun Accessories

New York – -(AmmoLand.com)- It isn’t bans on some semiautomatic weapons that the New Progressive Left is gunning for: It’s a ban on all semiautomatic weapons and all component parts of those weapons, and all accessories for those weapons.

The very fact that the Radical Left uses vague and scary expressions, ‘assault weapon’ and ‘high capacity magazine’ isn’t by accident, and this point must be pointed out, apart from the pejorative connotations of those expressions. The expressions are deliberately ‘scary’ to instill a feeling of repugnance in the minds of the target audience. And the phrases are vague and open-ended in meaning to allow Congress to place into these categories anything and everything they wish.

The Arbalest Quarrel has previously and repeatedly pointed out that the goal of antigun proponents is to ban all semiautomatic weapons, not just some of them, and this has proved prescient as the New Progressive Left antigun crowd [read-Socilist Democrats] is beginning to use the expressions, ‘fully-automatic weapon’ and ‘semi-automatic weapon’ interchangeably. If these radical antigun Leftists are successful, then the exercise of the Second Amendment will become increasingly more difficult, and that is the real aim of antigun zealots.

Their goal is to destroy the Second Amendment because the citizenry’s exercise of the right to keep and bear arms, codified in the Second Amendment, operates as an existential threat to the ultimate goal they wish to achieve: absolute control of the population and subjugation of the citizenry.

To achieve the ultimate goal of expanding Government exponentially and controlling all thought and behavior of the American public through absolute control of the police, the military, the intelligence apparatuses, the media, and control of the policy-making arms of Government, the New Progressive Left antigun zealots realize they must disarm the citizenry. De facto repeal of the right of the Second Amendment is, then, their penultimate goal. The New Progressive Left must accomplish the destruction of the Second Amendment if they are to be able to subjugate the citizenry, and, in so doing, they will begin to bring to fruition, their supreme goal: a Marxist-Socialist Dictatorship that will emerge from the tattered remains of our Republic. But, the New Progressive Left politicians must first curry public support for their unconstitutional, unconscionable antigun policy objectives and measures. In that effort, we find antigun groups, the Press, and antigun politicians of the New Progressive Left unfailingly and endlessly utilizing the fictions their public relations firms create for the specific purpose of manipulating the public into supporting policies antithetical to the preservation of the Second Amendment.

These fictions include loaded, emotionally charged terminology: ‘assault weapon,’ ‘military-style assault rifle,’ ‘weapon of war,’ and “high capacity magazine.”

The public usually doesn’t even bother to ask for an explication of these expressions, and in the few instances when it does ask for an explanation, we see the antigun spokesperson often saying that the targeted weapons look like and operate like military weapons. This, of course, is a nonsensical response, first, because the military isn’t interested in the appearance of firearms merely for the sake of appearance, anyway, and, second, because the antigun pronouncement that civilian “assault weapons” operate like military “assault rifles” is simply wrong.

In weapons’ design and fabrication for military application, form follows function, not the other way around, and the critical importance of function of a weapon is that of operation and handling. The military, ‘assault rifle,’ by definition, is a selective fire, intermediate caliber weapon. The civilian version of an assault rifle, if the notion of a ‘civilian version’ of a military assault rifle is even meaningful, is hardly an adequate descriptor for weapons found in the non-military, i.e., civilian marketplace since such weapons are not capable of full-auto or short burst auto fire.

Antigun politicians and antigun zealots also claim that ‘assault weapons’ aren’t utilized for and are not really useful for hunting small game. But, how would they even know?

They never bother to explain, and the assertion is hardly self-evident, true. In fact, the assertion is false on two grounds. First, many Americans do use the weapon for hunting. It is light, accurate, and suitable for and, so, often marketed for that purpose. Second, even assuming, for the purpose of argument, that the antigun zealot’s claim was true, it doesn’t follow that Americans don’t have a right to possess these ‘assault weapons’ for other lawful uses, such as for home defense or simply for target shooting, or for competitive shooting. Those are all legitimate uses. Further, suppose, an American simply wants a fully functional so-called ‘assault weapon’ as a collectible. Why shouldn’t a law-abiding, responsible, rational American citizen be able to own and possess that weapon? It is no answer to say no American needs one. But, that is the answer often given. In fact, why should the law-abiding, responsible, rational American citizen even have to proffer a reason for owning and possessing a so-called ‘assault weapon’ at all? The antigun New Progressive Left activist simply presumes that a person must explain why he wishes to own and possess this or that firearm. No, he doesn’t. Where in the Constitution, in the Second Amendment, or in any other provision of the Constitution, does it say that an American citizen must demonstrate a purpose for or need for owning and possessing a particular firearm? Nowhere. The implicit understanding of the text of the Second Amendment is that a weapon is a personnel weapon, that, in fact, is expected to be used for, inter alia, military use. So, contrary, to the antigun New Progressive Left’s assertion that civilians are not permitted to own and possess a ‘weapon of war,’—a shibboleth that is accepted as true and obviously so—the import of the Second Amendment points to the falsity of the New Progressive Left’s claim.

The salient import of the Second Amendment is that the Nation is to be protected by a citizen army, no less so than by the Government’s own standing army; to help thwart a foreign aggressor; but also, and more particularly today, to protect the sovereignty, the integrity, and the autonomy of the American people from the visible and perverse threat posed by seditious insurgents within the Nation.

The threat that the antigun New Progressive Left poses to the American citizenry is manifest in the desire of the New Progressive Left’s intent on creating a massive, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent Federal Government: the antigun New Progressive Left’s God!

To that end, the antigun New Progressive Left has demonstrated an overt proclivity and, indeed, a marked, staunch, and, in their own words, ‘muscular’ desire to disarm the public, for the unmistakable, albeit unstated, purpose of controlling it. No better reason, then, for the civilian citizenry of the Nation to be well-armed, and well-armed, to the hilt.

As for ammunition magazines, the retort to the perfunctory exclamation of the antigun New Progressive Left that no one needs high capacity magazines is threefold.

• First, we begin with the obvious: ammunition magazines are a necessary component of semiautomatic weapons. And, as for what constitutes an acceptable number of cartridges, and what might, to the antigun radical Left activist constitute an unacceptable, “high capacity,” ammunition magazine, no one can reasonably define what ‘high capacity’ means; any attempt to do so reduces to arbitrary absurdity.
• Second, an ammunition magazine holding several rounds, for home defense, makes simple common-sense, whether an innocent individual faces one assailant or several assailants. The imposition of limitations on the number of cartridges a given ammunition magazine is, for a particular firearm, under law, permitted to hold, are ultimately arbitrary senseless and pointless.
• Third, going back to the initial antigun pronouncement that the average, law-abiding, rational, responsible civilian citizen simply doesn’t need a ‘high capacity’ ammunition magazines, whatever that expression, ‘high capacity’ means, simply begs the question whether one does need such high capacity ammunition magazines to adequately thwart a potential threat.

“Need,” in and of itself, namely “need per se,” is defined by purpose. But, the antigun proponent’s pronouncement that a person doesn’t need a ‘high capacity magazine’ is logically faulty on other grounds. There are many things a person possesses that a person may not need. There are wants as well. Suppose I just happen to want a so-called ‘assault weapon’ and so-called high capacity ammunition magazine, as a component of that weapon.

Why shouldn’t I, as an average, law-abiding, rational, responsible citizen, be able to have one? It is no answer to say society will be safer if I don’t have certain weapons and certain ammunition magazines.

Extrapolating from misuse of any firearm by a dangerous lunatic and psychopathic criminal to me and tens of millions of other Americans who desire to exercise their natural right to own and possess these firearms and ammunition magazines and who are not lunatics or psychopathic criminals is to constrain, unconstitutionally and unconscionably, tens of millions of Americans due to the actions of a few undesirables.

No greater need exists, today, than for a citizen army to be well-armed against the real threat of a Marxist-Socialist takeover of the Government and the enslavement of the American citizenry that such a takeover would entail. It is just this dire need that exists and more so now than ever before in light of those who argue that no need exists for so-called ‘weapons of war.’ The American citizenry must be well-armed to thwart a possible takeover of our Government by this antigun New Progressive Left that is intent on destroying our Nation’s Constitution; that is intent on erasing our Nation’s history; and that is intent on endowing the Federal Government with the means necessary to do so: to subjugate the American citizenry, and thoroughly control all thought and action.

About The Arbalest Quarrel:

Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel’ website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.

For more information, visit: www.arbalestquarrel.com.

The post Radical Left’s Four-Prong Strategy For Destroying 2A: Step-One More Gun Bans appeared first on AmmoLand.com.