Leftists would love SWATing gun owners. How would they react to these being applied to their basic human rights?
Several months ago, Colion Noir had the media’s collective knickers in a twist over a video asking whether we should apply the same standards to other constitutional liberties as we apply to the Second Amendment. For some, certain civil rights are sacrosanct, while others can be tossed away without a second thought. The fact is they are all vitally important to the conservation of liberty.
A column on the same subject admonished the national socialist media for perpetuating Media Contagion forwarding the idea that they need to stop selectively glorifying these killers. He followed it up with this:
You can still report on the shootings … we just need reasonable laws that place limitations on the glory and fame you give to these killers and their twisted motivations…
You know that feeling of anxiety that shot through your body when I said the government should pass laws to limit the media’s ability to exercise their First Amendment right.
That’s the same feeling gun owners get when they hear people say the same thing about the Second Amendment. Hearing me advocate for the government’s ability to limit anyone’s First Amendment rights, including the media, should anger all of you watching this video, the same way it should anger you when anyone tries to use the same limitations on the Second Amendment.
Making the point that everyone should have the same exact reaction whenever someone talks about ‘common sense’ limitations on liberty, whether it’s about the 2nd amendment or any other parts of the bill of rights.
He finished the video with this statement:
I honestly believe ignoring shooters and not giving them any attention will do more to stop school shootings than any gun control measure ever will.
However, I vehemently disagree with the government infringing on the media’s First Amendment rights the same way I don’t believe the government should infringe on anyone’s Second Amendment rights.
The solution to the problem we all want to solve will only come with a firm commitment to all of our rights—not just the ones you think are important.
The national socialist media lost their collective minds since they neglected to watch that in it’s entirety, as detailed in the follow up video:
The point in all of this is that if they became incensed at the destruction of one civil liberty, why don’t they have the same reaction to the destruction of all the others?
What do you consider to be the least important liberty?
Consider the following thought experiment, how would the national socialist media react to blatant prior restraint controls over their content with a 1st Amendment version of ‘red flag’ gun confiscation SWATing? Granted, we’re in the business ourselves, so we would vehemently oppose such a draconian measure.
Would the other parts of the nation’s press have the same lack of concern for such a step as they have with so-called ‘red flag’ laws for the 2nd amendment? The national socialist media is clearly pushing for these draconian laws while they layer on a syrupy coating of Orwellian doublespeak.
These laws clearly entail the taking of one’s means of self-defense with a pre-dawn no-knock raid from a SWAT team. If the members of one’s household survive this assault, the owner of said private property can look forward to months of court appearances and legal costs to prove themselves innocent after essentially being deemed guilty. Never mind the irreparable damage to one’s reputation as being the subject of such a raid in the middle of the night.
But for the denizens’ of the nation’s socialist media this is merely a move to ‘temporarily’ remove the firearms of someone in crisis or similarly sugar coated language. This being exemplified by the description of these in an AP article pushing for ‘a strong red flag law that would allow courts to issue life-saving extreme risk protection orders.’ The bias against the inalienable human right of self-defense is palpable here, but would they approach an equivalent measure that impacts their civil liberties with the same lack of concern?
Thought experiment: Applying ‘red flag’ laws to other constitutional liberties.
How would the national socialist media write a story in which the debate was over ‘temporarily’ taking away their rights? Would they consider it ‘progress’ to have anyone issue an anonymous charge and shut down their operations for a year or more?
How would the bird-cage liner of record react to a SWAT team swarming the offices of the New York Times, USA Today, Denver Post or Chicago Tribune to shut them down over a spurious complaint that they were a ‘danger?
The New York Times enthusiastically celebrated a mass murderer Mao Zedong as “one of history’s great revolutionary figures.” It should also be noted the attitude of mass murderer Mao towards firearms: “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” Nothing gums up the works of a system to mass murder millions like a few thousand peasants with ‘weapons of war’. However, in their wondrous Utopia, government is always a benevolent father, never the source of oppression. The true danger arises from inanimate objects such as AK-47’s and airplanes that ‘take aim’ at people without human intervention.
What if someone decided such talk was subversive and anonymously filed for a ‘red flag’ to have the courts issue a ‘life-saving extreme risk protection order’ to shut them down for several months or years? Whereby they would have to prove they weren’t a danger?
The bottom line: This is just a thought experiment, we are not advocating this step.
Keep in mind this is just a thought experiment, we are not advocating these actions, nor are we trying to give the authoritarians any more ideas than they already have. The point is that all of the civil liberties in the bill of rights are equally important and that shifting these ideas over to a different right should give pause to those advocating these draconian actions.
We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.
[gravityform id=”2″ title=”true” description=”false”]
Promo for Mike Lindell's New Daily Show
All ORIGINAL content on this site is © 2021 NOQ Report. All REPUBLISHED content has received direct or implied permission for reproduction.
With that said, our content may be reproduced and distributed as long as it has a link to the original source and the author is credited prominently. We don’t mind you using our content as long as you help out by giving us credit with a prominent link. If you feel like giving us a tip for the content, we will not object!
JD Rucker – EIC