Connect with us

Guns and Crime

Evolution of a lie: ‘We’re not talking about taking guns away from people’

Published

on

Mass murder shootings have become all too common these days due in no small part to the destruction of society’s moral underpinnings by the nation’s left through the vestiges of cultural Marxism. They also revel in using such tragedies to advance their cause of depriving the people of their common sense civil right of armed self defense. Consequently, the minute one occurs the clarion call for even more people control will ascend from their ranks.

The past few years have seen their propaganda evolve and change, and this will be an examination of this evolution as well as a short reference list that puts the lie to their oft repeated talking point that no one is talking about taking guns away from people.

A reference list of lies

In the past, the gun grabbers rarely brought up Confiscationthe ‘C’ word. Back then, that was just for certain types of weapons with a divide and conquer strategy. At the time, the propaganda was epitomised by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif with this from a “60 minutes” interview on CBS: “If I could have 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 have done it.”

Never mind that the term “Assault Weapon” has no set definition and could be applied to any type of object usable as a weapon to assault someone.

Even as recently as 2011 it was a case of where the nation’s Left was trying to implement gun control “but under the radar”

The contradictory line has always been as Nancy Pelosi said recently: “We’re not talking about taking guns away from people”. They have to maintain this fiction because confiscation requires the precursor steps of ‘Intergalactic Background Checks’ and registration. The people wouldn’t accede to these measures if they knew it meant their property was to be stolen from them. This is why the gun grabbers have solemnly promised that ‘Intergalactic Background Checks’ won’t lead to registration. And why gun grabbers solemnly promise that registration wouldn’t lead to Confiscation, or the other form when they are made an offer they couldn’t refuse in the form of a mandatory gun “Buy Back”. So, the gun grabbers had to maintain the lie that the ultimate objective of their endeavour wasn’t their ultimate objective.

But times have changed and these days the gun grabbers strive to maintain the fiction that they aren’t talking about confiscation while they talk about confiscation. This will be a guide to their calls for the repeal of the 2nd amendment, confiscation, banning of guns or whatever phrases they have chosen to employ. There really shouldn’t be any sort of list given the line “We’re not talking about taking guns away from people”. But since the nation’s Left will often lie out of both sides of their mouth, it will be an abbreviated enumeration of most of the recent occasions when they expressed a desire for “taking guns away from people”.

As mentioned previously, Leftists had confined their gun confiscation dreams certain kinds of weaponry. For example, In March 2012 there was one author “themoderateman” on the site ‘The Daily Kos’, Who out of the sheer generosity of his heart was willing to mete out the people’s common sense civil rights, letting them keep certain guns… but taking everything else: Yes conservatives, we want to take away your guns…

Such magnanimous generosity over our fundamental human rights did not last for long, however, soon after came the re-election of Barack Obama and the horrific mass murder at Sandy Hook in December 2012 and the floodgates opened up. The nation’s Left saw that time as an historic opportunity to be honest about what they truly wanted. Keyword searches before the Fall of 2012 of such terms as ‘Confiscation’ ,‘Gun ban’, ‘Repeal the 2nd amendment’ yielded few results. December 2012 saw an emboldened Left dropping the mask and expanding reach of their confiscation desires to semi-automatic firearms – and that would essentially be most firearms.

Governor . Andrew M. Cuomo (D – New York) inaugurated the proceedings with the words “Confiscation could be an option.”

That turning point in gun grabber history had them calling for confiscation whenever possible and they have never looked back. The same keyword searches will yield a deluge of results, this will just be a short compilation of those results.

[Note: Due to the sheer number of references, this will be an abbreviated list confined to just the links and short descriptions in some cases from the main players in the gun grabber realm]

October 2017

(CNN)Sachs: Ban semiautomatic assault weapons and save lives

Rawstory: So few Americans understand what the Second Amendment is really about — or its dark history [repeal the Second Amendment.]
New York Times: The Cancer in the Constitution [2nd amendment]
Prospect magazine: Dear America: it’s time to grow up and ban guns

Plan A Magazine: Ban Guns. Amend the Constitution.
The New York Times: Repeal the Second Amendment
The Week: Ban guns
Eugene Robinson: Gun control should include buyback program like Australia’s

Dan Pfeiffer: What to Bring to the Gun Fight [national gun registry, Tracking and limiting purchases of ammunition and a national gun buyback program]
Washington Post Editorial Board : “President Trump, end this ‘American carnage.'”[Australian-Style Gun Ban]

July 2016

Clinton Delegate Explains How Democrats Will Ban All Guns

June 2016

Rolling Stone: Why It’s Time to Repeal the Second Amendment

December 2015

The New York Times: End the Gun Epidemic in America [First Front Page Editorial In 95 Years]
Huffington Post: We don’t need gun control. We need domestic disarmament
New Republic: It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them.
Salon: The Second Amendment must go: We ban lawn darts. It’s time to ban guns

November 2015

The Daily Beast: Yes, They Want to Take Your Guns Away

October 2015

Baltimore Sun: Repeal the Second Amendment
The Daily Kos: Effective Gun Control – A National Semi-Auto Ban

Hillary Clinton: “In the Australian example, as I recall, that was a buyback program.”…..“I think it would be worth considering doing it on the national level”

Barack Obama: “We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours — Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it.”
The Washington Post: A gun-free society

U.S. News & World Report: It’s True, Democrats Want to Take Your Guns

June 2015

Sun-Sentinel: Don’t just get rid of flag, get rid of the gun, too

Please note that this was a transitional time period for the nation’s Left they had gone from just wanting to ban the undefined construct “Assault Weapon” to some wanting to ban semi-auto firearms, while others wanted to confiscate everything. Over time this would evolve to most leftists wanting a complete ban on guns in various forms.

January 7, 2015

Tallahassee Democrat: Stop the insanity: Ban guns

December 2014

Wisconsin gazette: Time is overdue to repeal the Second Amendment

June 2014

Barack Obama: “A couple of decades ago, Australia had a mass shooting similar to Columbine or Newtown. And Australia just said, well, that’s it — we’re not seeing that again. And basically imposed very severe, tough gun laws.”

May 2014

LA Times: Opinion You say gun control doesn’t work? Fine. Let’s ban guns altogether.

December 2012

House Dem: ‘Turn in your guns’
The Daily Kos: How to Ban Guns: A step by step, long term process

Curiously enough, all this talk of gun confiscation didn’t ameliorate the people’s fears of gun confiscation and they rose in opposition to the practice, joined the NRA,GOA and local civil rights organizations, bought more guns and stocked up on ammunition. As is usually the case, the fervor died down until the next ‘serious crisis’ took place and the demands for Confiscation began once again. This has been repeated every time with the demands becoming more and more numerous…


At this point in time the question has to be asked: Who HASN’T about taking guns away from people?

Advertisement
4 Comments

4 Comments

  1. Pingback: Evolution Of A Lie: “We’re not talking about taking guns away from people” – #Logic Wins

  2. Pingback: Video: What is Socialism (and why It’s closely tied to Gun Confiscation) – #Logic Wins

  3. Keith Smith

    March 30, 2018 at 11:02 am

    The day that they pass gun confiscation legislation is the day that the armed revolution begins. That is not opinion…

  4. Berzrkr50

    May 12, 2018 at 4:18 pm

    I’d much rather ban Democraps. They’re much more dangerous to America’s health…

Leave a Reply

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

Guns and Crime

Nevada to seek death penalty for illegal alien Wilber Ernesto Martinez-Guzman

Published

on

Nevada to seek death penalty for illegal alien Wilber Ernesto Martinez-Guzman

Prosecutors in two counties where an illegal immigrant allegedly murdered four people are seeking the death penalty for his crimes. North Nevada was shaken by the string of murders until the alleged killer was apprehended by law enforcement in January.

Wilber Ernesto Martinez-Guzman, 20, was arrested January 19, 2019, by Washoe County Sheriff’s department and charged with multiple offenses while prosecutors and investigators worked on charging him for the four murders. They rarely invoke the death penalty but the severity and heinous nature of the crimes warrant capital punishment, according to prosecutors.

“We reserve the death penalty for the worst of the worst,” Washoe County District Attorney Chris Hicks said last Thursday. “We use it sparingly.”

The illegal immigrant from El Salvador is accused of shooting and killing Gerald David, 81, and his wife, Sharon, 80, in Reno and Connie Koontz, 56, and Sophia Renken, 74, in Gardnerville.

My Take

Just as traffic fines are doubled in construction zones, so too should penalties be increased when illegal immigrants commit crimes. His immigration status was not taken into account, but the crimes themselves were enough for prosecutors to seek the death penalty.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Conservatism

Rewarding terrorism: Why are we encouraging mass murder with more liberty control?

Published

on

By

Rewarding terrorism Why are we encouraging mass murder with more liberty control

Does it ever occur to the Left that depriving the people of the ability to defend themselves is exactly what the terrorists want?

Solving any type of problem begins with the proper determination of the cause of the problem. Mistakenly ascribing the wrong cause only serves to make the situation far worse because the wrong solutions are then applied.

The cause of the recent phenomena of mass murder attacks is a perverse desire for fame. This is why the miscreant in the recent tragedy in New Zealand posted a ‘manifesto’ and live streamed his horrific and cowardly actions. [Please note that we are not using his name or image]. This is also why he came out in favour of liberty [gun] control.

Rewarding behavior results in more of that behavior

Consider that the reprobates who perpetrate these attacks desperately want to make a name for themselves. Most people in this world want to do something positive to achieve fame. Some compete in athletic events, cure disease or work to solve societal problems. However, there are those who don’t have the ability or time to do this, so they decide to gain this by infamy instead. They choose to become infamous, shooting their way into the history books, with others helping them along the way by playing right into their hands with the notoriety by depriving others of their liberty.

They look at what mass murderers have done to achieve what they desperately crave. One way is to play into the hands of the Left looking to deprive the people of their right of self-defense. What better way to become infamous than to be the cause of a protracted battle over this fundamental human right?

Getting the reward of more media coverage by the cause of liberty [gun] control

The reprobate in the New Zealand attack made the entirely obvious point that many everyday items – including ordinary flour – can serve as explosives. As well as the fact that fuel mixtures can also be used for explosive or incendiary attacks, something the liberty grabber left doesn’t seem to understand is that these are also ‘weapons of war’. Alternatively there are other ordinary objects that can serve as weapons of mass murder ranging from blunt force, or edge weapons to vehicular attacks. He explicitly stated that he used firearms to attract more attention and have it be the cause of more leftist restrictions on freedom.

Even though they never discerned motive for the Las Vegas mass murder, court documents alluded to the idea that the reprobate in that crime had gun control as his cause celebre. Now in the case of the New Zealand attack, the miscreant was explicit about this in his rantings.

I chose firearms for the affect (sic) it would have on social discourse, the extra media coverage they would provide and the affect it could have on the politics of United states (sic) and thereby the political situation of the world. The US is torn into many factions by its second amendment, along state, social, cultural and, most importantly, racial lines.

[Our emphasis]
Note the words ‘the extra media coverage they would provide’ in reference to the use of firearms. It wasn’t just that he wanted the ‘media coverage’ from live streaming this horror with writing all over his weapons or posting a long screed where he claimed to be an ‘eco-fascist’ admiring Communist China. He wanted to have this abject horror show to be the cause of excessive media coverage resulting in the deprivation of everyone’s commonsense human and civil rights.

Most of these mass murderers don’t expect to survive these attacks, but they want to ‘live on’ in infamy by any means possible. Having the media cover their horrific crimes through their perennial hobbyhorse of gun confiscation means plenty of airtime trying to make the case for these freedom-ending measures.

Leftists don’t seem to understand that their much vaunted restrictions on liberty actually make it easier for these miscreants to carry out their horrific crimes. Most of these take place in ‘gun free’ zones because the victims cannot defend themselves, making everyone an easy target and upping the body count. Despite the denial of reality of the liberty grabbers, there have also been many cases of someone on the scene halting an attack, usually with a gun. Not to mention that these crimes are always stopped when armed authority arrives.

Should we encourage further attacks by giving the terrorists exactly what they want?

Studies have shown that the extensive coverage of these horrific crimes inspires further attacks. Thus, many have chosen to not publicize the crimes of these miscreants, granting them the infamy they crave. Shouldn’t we also apply the same rule to the policy agendas openly advocated by these reprobates?

Does it make any sense to punish the innocent for the horrific acts of a criminal? Punishments that encourage and even facilitate future attacks? Criminals and terrorists will always find ways to kill or get the weaponry to do so, as attacks in places of severe restrictions on Liberty prove this to be the case. In point of fact, these restrictions only serve to help these miscreants commit their crimes, does it make any sense to continue the practice?

The Takeaway

Mass murdering terrorists crave publicity for their horrific acts of cowardice. They also seek to change society by these acts. Knuckling under and playing along with what they want only serves to encourage further attacks. The innocent having the means to defend themselves is the practical and philosophical response to terror, no matter if it runs counter to the desires of the liberty grabber left.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Houston library had Alberto Garza, a registered child sex offender, read stories to children for Drag Queen Storytime

Published

on

Houston library had Alberto Garza a registered child sex offender read stories to children for Drag

Conservatives know the LGBTQ community has their say in most aspects of life in America today. Their political and cultural influence is unquestionable and public organizations jump through hoops to appease the various groups. Many libraries have even embrace “Drag Queen Storytime” as a way to teach tolerance to children by allowing transvestites to read stories to children.

Houston Public Library is one such progressive public organization that has embraced the practice. Unfortunately, they didn’t do anything to protect the children that visit the library by allowing “Tatiana Mala Nina” to read for the children. The problem arose because”Tatiana” is actually Alberto Garza, a 32-year-old child sex offender.

My Take

Houston Public Library has apologized. Is that really enough? Mistakes happen, but there are certain situations and jobs in which extra special care must be taken. Our public libraries, which are often considered to be truly safe places and popular venues for children to learn, should be able to give a reasonable expectation to parents that registered child sex offenders are not given explicit access to children.

This is gross negligence. I may be in the minority on this one, but this is a terminable offense in my books. Someone’s head should roll.

Keep in mind I rarely call for anyone to be fired for a single offense, but this is literally the worst case scenario for a library administrator. When you give someone access to the children that come to the library, they cannot be convicted child sex offenders. That’s sort of a no-brainer.

Nothing will likely happen beyond the apology, but here’s hoping.

So many exceptions are made for “alternative lifestyles” for the sake of tolerance. But when this tolerance allows a convicted child sex offender to have access to small children, the exceptions have gone way to far. This is absolutely unacceptable.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report