GOP: Collapse on Guns and It’s All Over

 

Kurt Schlichter has a great post up at TownHall.

“Here is my proposed gun control compromise following the latest attack on children that millions of us did not commit. Ready? You gun fascists can kiss my Schumer and we keep our guns. In fact, let’s also repeal the National Firearms Act and impose national constitutional carry.”

This is what I’m talking about when I say that I do not care about the details of the Uvalde shooting, etc. I already know where I stand on an issue that transcends crime and violence from a pro-constitutional point of view.

It’s a good article with plenty of timely political commentary, and I agree with everything in it.  If this election is truly the Republicans’ to lose — going flaccid on guns is exactly how to lose it.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 74 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    I Walton (View Comment):

    Garry Robbins. You’re playing their game again. Is anyone proposing any of the things you say? Of course not. Are folks proposing doing away with guns. Yes. Will that work in the interests of the vast majority of Americans? No. Will it work in the favor of folks who commit crimes? Yes. Will it work in the interests of those who want a totalitarian government? Yes. The question is simple and our history was pretty clear.

    Will he actually meaningfully respond? 

    No

    • #61
  2. Terry Mott Member
    Terry Mott
    @TerryMott

    Douglas Pratt (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Douglas Pratt (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    We tell young men they’re worthless, they have no future, and if they display any masculine traits, they’re “toxic.” And then we wonder why they despair and want to go out in a blaze of “glory.”

     

    Precisely. We teach them that the world is ending in 12 years or whatever it is now, that everything bad is their fault and there’s no way they can ever make amends or apologize for it. We make it “cool” to pretend to be un-masculine. Then we wonder why they commit suicide, overdose on drugs, or shoot up schools.

    This is all the end result of the decades-long War on Boys. And now we’re in the endgame stages.

    Yup. And what’s the only way that a white boy can escape all this relentless blame? Declare that he’s gay. Suddenly he’s a member of a privileged group instead of the target of hate.

     

    Gay and/or trans.  I’ve seen this first-hand in a close friend’s family.

    • #62
  3. Dbroussa Coolidge
    Dbroussa
    @Dbroussa

    BDB (View Comment):
    WWRD?

    Alas, he would support more regulations on firearms. That what he Did, no reason to believe he wouldn’t support even more now. 

    • #63
  4. Tex929rr Coolidge
    Tex929rr
    @Tex929rr

    I sent Cornyn’s office a message today that if he negotiates with the Dems on gun control it’s the last time I ever vote for him.

    Some years ago Lamar Smith started playing footsie with house Dems on gun control.  The next year he had an unknown challenger get 30 percent of the primary vote and he got reborn hard as a conservative and stayed there. 

    • #64
  5. Rōnin Coolidge
    Rōnin
    @Ronin

    I knew the fix was in when I read that old Mitch “the cocaine kid,” had designated “I work for the Dallas Chamber of Commerce” Cornyn to work with Democrats to come up with a plan to “do something.”  Ya, they are going to do something alright.

    • #65
  6. Paul Stinchfield Member
    Paul Stinchfield
    @PaulStinchfield

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    Let’s see if I can make everyone happy by playing the shooting blame game. Choose your villain. NRA, Putin, Trump, Zelenskyy, Biden, Video games, Covid, or insert your own favorite villain. There are thousands out there besides the actual shooter.

    Blame the shooter first, but then remember all the ways the left has worked to tear apart our culture–because, as a famous leftist revolutionary once said, the worse things get, the better.

    • #66
  7. Paul Stinchfield Member
    Paul Stinchfield
    @PaulStinchfield

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):

    Garry Robbins. You’re playing their game again. Is anyone proposing any of the things you say? Of course not. Are folks proposing doing away with guns. Yes. Will that work in the interests of the vast majority of Americans? No. Will it work in the favor of folks who commit crimes? Yes. Will it work in the interests of those who want a totalitarian government? Yes. The question is simple and our history was pretty clear.

    Will he actually meaningfully respond?

    No

    In my life I have seen a lot of “reasonable, moderate” people who always counseled “compromise” with those who seek to take away our liberty.

    • #67
  8. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    I Walton (View Comment):

    Garry Robbins. You’re playing their game again. Is anyone proposing any of the things you say? Of course not. Are folks proposing doing away with guns. Yes. Will that work in the interests of the vast majority of Americans? No. Will it work in the favor of folks who commit crimes? Yes. Will it work in the interests of those who want a totalitarian government? Yes. The question is simple and our history was pretty clear.

    Mr. Robbins is a master of the Reductio ad Hysterium.

    • #68
  9. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Awright, take it outside, boys.

    • #69
  10. DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax)
    @DonG

    Barry Jones (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Once you accept 21, then who conducts the next study showing you that the answer is actually 25?

    The slippery slope is a fallacy. We draw lines where it is culturally appropriate. You are arguing that 18 is a magic number. I am saying that 3 years after high school is a magic number. If high school ended at 15, then 18 would be OK.

    Why isn’t this issue one that should be settled at the State level? We are supposed to be a Federal Republic so let us act as one.

    I am good with that.   New York just banned semi-automatic rifle purchases by 18-21 year olds.  I guess bolt,lever,pump action are all OK. 

    • #70
  11. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    Barry Jones (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Once you accept 21, then who conducts the next study showing you that the answer is actually 25?

    The slippery slope is a fallacy. We draw lines where it is culturally appropriate. You are arguing that 18 is a magic number. I am saying that 3 years after high school is a magic number. If high school ended at 15, then 18 would be OK.

    Why isn’t this issue one that should be settled at the State level? We are supposed to be a Federal Republic so let us act as one.

    I am good with that. New York just banned semi-automatic rifle purchases by 18-21 year olds. I guess bolt,lever,pump action are all OK.

    So then 18-21 year olds are not adults.  Somebody tell the draft board / Selective Service registry.  If the several states can wipe away a “shall not be infringed” right, then what use is any of the document?

    • #71
  12. Full Size Tabby Member
    Full Size Tabby
    @FullSizeTabby

    BDB (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    Barry Jones (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Once you accept 21, then who conducts the next study showing you that the answer is actually 25?

    The slippery slope is a fallacy. We draw lines where it is culturally appropriate. You are arguing that 18 is a magic number. I am saying that 3 years after high school is a magic number. If high school ended at 15, then 18 would be OK.

    Why isn’t this issue one that should be settled at the State level? We are supposed to be a Federal Republic so let us act as one.

    I am good with that. New York just banned semi-automatic rifle purchases by 18-21 year olds. I guess bolt,lever,pump action are all OK.

    So then 18-21 year olds are not adults. Somebody tell the draft board / Selective Service registry. If the several states can wipe away a “shall not be infringed” right, then what use is any of the document?

    We can discuss the details of the age issue, but I’d like to point out that after explaining that keeping guns out of the hands of 18 – 20 year old men may reduce some violence, advocates also need to be prepared to explain to the 20 year old woman with the abusive stalking 21 year old ex-boyfriend (or maybe her ex-boyfriend’s criminal friend) why she is not permitted to protect herself from being beaten up or killed. 

    • #72
  13. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    Barry Jones (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Once you accept 21, then who conducts the next study showing you that the answer is actually 25?

    The slippery slope is a fallacy. We draw lines where it is culturally appropriate. You are arguing that 18 is a magic number. I am saying that 3 years after high school is a magic number. If high school ended at 15, then 18 would be OK.

    Why isn’t this issue one that should be settled at the State level? We are supposed to be a Federal Republic so let us act as one.

    I am good with that. New York just banned semi-automatic rifle purchases by 18-21 year olds. I guess bolt,lever,pump action are all OK.

    So then 18-21 year olds are not adults. Somebody tell the draft board / Selective Service registry. If the several states can wipe away a “shall not be infringed” right, then what use is any of the document?

    We can discuss the details of the age issue, but I’d like to point out that after explaining that keeping guns out of the hands of 18 – 20 year old men may reduce some violence, advocates also need to be prepared to explain to the 20 year old woman with the abusive stalking 21 year old ex-boyfriend (or maybe her ex-boyfriend’s criminal friend) why she is not permitted to protect herself from being beaten up or killed.

    I am all for extending the age of majority to these folk.  Not sure those under 21 should vote either.  Same arguments apply.

    • #73
  14. Dbroussa Coolidge
    Dbroussa
    @Dbroussa

    BDB (View Comment):
    So then 18-21 year olds are not adults.  Somebody tell the draft board / Selective Service registry.  If the several states can wipe away a “shall not be infringed” right, then what use is any of the document?

    The problem with Heller is that while it did one extremely important thing, clarify that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, it did not define the level of scrutiny that should be used to review laws that infringe on the right.  Speech is covered under strict scrutiny review, but Heller has been interpreted to allow for a rational review which allows much more latitude for the gov’t to restrict the rights.  For a law to pass a strict scrutiny test, the gov’t must show that it has a compelling interest (protecting citizens qualifies), but they also must show that they have enacted a law that is either narrowly tailored or the least restrictive way of accomplishing the goal.

    So, let’s look at raising the age of purchases from 18-21.  Is there a compelling interest?  Sure.  Is this narrowly tailored or least restrictive?  For me, it isn’t.  One argument of narrow tailoring is that the law would only restrict 18-21 year old’s and not anyone over 21.  To me this falls flat if one looks at the number of firearms bought legally by 18-21 year old’s compared to ones used to kill people.  Since so few people are killed by semi-automatic rifles each year that the FBI doesn’t keep stats on them as opposed to all rifles, and even the total number of all rifles is quite small compared to other means.  Thus, this law would deny the right to the vast majority of lawful purchasers to stop a vanishingly small number of incidents.

    Compare that to the Florida version of this law that raises the age to 21, but allows for a parent, or the court to allow a person to purchase a desired firearm.  The idea that an “adult” is restricted seems wrong to me.  After all, supposedly an 18 year old is allowed to exercise their rights as an adult, except for drinking, but that isn’t an enumerated right.  But, by allowing someone else to vouch for the purchaser means that the vast majority of 18-21 year old’s, they might have to spend a little more energy, but perhaps it isn’t an “undue burden”.

    • #74
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.