Ignorance, Not Immigration, Is the Real Threat to the Second Amendment: Rebutting David Codrea's Article

Last month, I published an article titled, “Immigration, Assimilation, and the Second Amendment: A Candid Perspective.” If you haven’t read it, I encourage you to do so. The gist of my argument was that educational failure is behind not just gun control, but the overall erosion of civic culture and a respect for the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

What motivated me to write it was Virginia’s latest round of gun control, which was co-sponsored by Delegate JJ Singh (D). I was majorly irritated by JJ Singh’s tweet in support of gun control, and at the same time, I saw the seeds of anti-immigrant and some outright racist sentiment taking hold in the Second Amendment community.

My article turned out to be an unexpected “prebuttal” of an article published last week in Ammoland by David Codrea titled, “Gun Groups Failing Members by Ignoring Immigration Threat.” I admire David’s work, but I vehemently disagree with his argument. This article will further my case that ignorance, not immigration, is the real threat to the Second Amendment.

Ideas and attitudes aren’t tied to genetics, and culture is a moving target

Assimilation is a process that takes a generation or two at the most, as seen by previous waves of immigration to the United States. The ideas, attitudes, and culture of the children and grandchildren of immigrants change and become part of the whole, even if the immigrants themselves retain theirs. That’s why the late Justice Antonin Scalia was American, not Sicilian. That’s why Vivek Ramaswamy is American, not Indian. That’s why Donald J. Trump is American, not Scottish or German.

Secondly, culture can change without immigration. Exhibit A for this is Vermont, the most rural and whitest state (>91% white) in the country with a negligible immigrant population, no big city or large federal bureaucrat workforce, that has still has moved slowly and steadily towards gun control.

Unlike Virginia, which had racist gun control on the books, Vermont never had gun control until 2018 (i.e., Parkland) and, to paraphrase from Codrea’s article, no “engineered demographic changes” or “importation of anti-gun voters who present an existential threat to our Second Amendment rights.”

Even if we put all the blame for Virginia’s gun control on immigration and a large federal workforce, what explains Vermont? Maple syrup in the water?

Gun control’s history debunks the “immigration threat” to the Second Amendment

Leaving today’s Vermont-Virginia comparison aside, history also debunks the “immigration threat” to the Second Amendment. The biggest lurches towards gun control happened with the National Firearms Act (1934), Gun Control Act (1968), the Brady Bill (1993), and the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (1994). The demographics of the country during those years were as follows:

1934: white population 89–90%, immigrant population (all races) 10–12%

1968: white population 87–88%, immigrant population (all races) ~5%

1993/94: white population 80%, immigrant population (all races) 8–9%

The worst gun control that we suffer to this day was passed by an overwhelmingly white, native-born electorate with immigrants having little say in it.

Even within a person’s lifetime, political ideas, attitudes, and voting preferences change

How many of us have changed our ideas, attitudes, beliefs, and voting habits as we grew older? I can think of some prominent people who went from liberal to conservative or libertarian as they grew older. Nothing is hardwired.

The French have a saying (that some readers won’t like): “If you're not a socialist at 20, you have no heart; if you're still a socialist at 30, you have no brain.”

There’s a funny meme that illustrates political fluidity:

Alternative perspective: the act of having kids makes people conservative. pic.twitter.com/bVDf4a8MBH

— Ranjit Singh (@AuthorSingh) October 19, 2025

Knowledge changes minds

Ignorance drives the bulk of gun control. Knowledge destroys ignorance, and thus gun control. I co-authored a book titled, “Each One, Teach One: Preserving and protecting the Second Amendment in the 21st century and beyond,” talking about just this, about how if everyone introduces a non-gun owner to guns, the gun control debate would be won overnight. It’s easy to troll someone on social media who calls for an “assault weapons” ban by asking him to define what an assault weapon is. But it’s far more fruitful to take someone to the range and introduce him or her to guns. The former might get you a quick dopamine hit, the latter will yield lasting public policy change in support of gun rights.

Antagonism changes minds too, in a bad way

Elections are won by coalition-building around policy, not identity. Woke identity politics antagonized a lot of voters and pushed them away. The 2024 winning coalition scooped up those alienated voters by building a coalition around policy. Identity politics with a conservative twist centered around race and/or religion will beget the same consequences that Woke identity politics did. In other words, adopting the failed ideas of the Woke Left in fear of the Woke Left getting into power will be a self-fulfilling prophecy that puts the Woke Left right back into power.

Second Amendment groups are doing the right thing by focusing on a single issue

In his article, Codrea says: “For reasons only they can explain, the “Big Three” don’t want to touch immigration.”  That’s good. Scope creep is bad for nonprofits, especially those built around a single-issue focus and powered by voluntary donations (including from immigrants). To win on the Second Amendment, these organizations need to focus on the Second Amendment, not abortion, not LGBT issues, not immigration, not climate change, not tariffs nor trade policy.

Second Amendment groups aren’t doing enough to woo immigrants and new Americans

After I took the oath of citizenship, I was greeted and registered to vote by the League of Women Voters. Gun rights groups were nowhere to be seen at the naturalization ceremony. There was zero outreach from any of them at any point before, during, or after my immigration and naturalization process. My embrace of gun ownership was 100% my own initiative. With the immigrant population at an estimated 16%, this task is extremely important and an area where gun rights advocates need to make a big push. In my book, I have a dedicated chapter on lawful immigrant and new citizen outreach. (Note my emphasis on “lawful”; I have contempt for illegal immigration.)

I believe that this is one of the worst possible times to divide ourselves by race and identity instead of unifying around policy. Gun rights advocates should be rallying around firearms education and evangelism, not fanning the flames of a new panic. I’m not serving you platitudes; I practice what I preach. Last year, I taught 33 students how to shoot. It was all voluntary work that I didn’t charge money for. My advocacy is driven by passion, not profit.

If you’re worried about the Second Amendment dying out, remember that its main enemy is ignorance, not immigration, and that’s what you should be fighting.

To quote President Ronald Reagan:

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.”

This is applicable to all new arrivals, whether they’re born here or get off a boat. America has absorbed immigrants throughout history, but it was driven by inculcating knowledge and pride in the founding documents. If that knowledge and pride wither, as has been the case for the past 5-6 decades, so will the Republic, with or without immigration.

Editor’s Note: The right of the people to keep and bear arms is just that; a right of the people. 

Help us continue to support, defend, secure, and strengthen that most fundamental of our rights. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.