Are Gun Control Advocates Liars, Or Just Stupid?

Are gun control advocates liars, people who willfully tell falsehoods, or are they just complete and total idiots? It’s a fair question and it could go either way. I’ll also concede that the word “or” in that first sentence may need to be “and” as well. It’s certainly possible that they’re both.


The latest example that makes me ask the question comes from the New York Times. In particular, columnist Gail Collins, who writes this bit:

The House Judiciary Committee just voted to make it impossible for a state to always keep people convicted of violent offenses from carrying concealed weapons.

With a beginning like that, you just know it’s going to be good. You know that you’re going to read a reasonable discourse on the topic of national reciprocity, right?

Let’s continue.

That was just a detail in a very long day and really dreadful debate about the right to bear arms. In a normal world it might be the talk of the dinner table, but really, this week hardly anyone noticed.

On the one hand you had Garrison Keillor and Matt Lauer getting canned for sexual harassment. On the other there’s the president of the United States circulating a picture of a Muslim beating up a statue of the Blessed Virgin. About which, the presidential spokeswoman said, “Whether it’s a real video, the threat is real.”

And I haven’t even gotten to the tax bill. Or North Korea. Good grief.

But still, guns. Attention must be paid. If you count every gun crime that involves four or more victims as a mass shooting, we’ve had 397 so far this year, including the ungodly tragedies in Las Vegas and the small Texas church. You’d think the National Rifle Association would go away and be quiet for a month or two. But no, its minions in the House of Representatives were busy on Wednesday getting committee approval for a bill that would make it impossible for states to impose their rules about carrying concealed weapons on people who are visiting from someplace else.

Instead, we’re supposed to respect the judgment of the state whence they came. People, do you have this kind of confidence? We are having this conversation two weeks after Wisconsin eliminated the age limit for hunting licenses. So far there are 1,800 happy Wisconsinites under the age of 10 with the right to put their little fingers on the trigger, several less than a year old.


First, Gail, there’s a huge difference between a concealed carry permit and a hunting license. National reciprocity has nothing to do with hunting, and Wisconsin’s decision to eliminate the age for a hunting permit doesn’t mean that small children will be running around the woods unsupervised. In fact, it’s kind of impossible for most kids to go hunting on their own anyway, what with needing a ride to the hunting land in the first place.

But let’s not let facts get in the way of an argument.

Kind of like that opening line. You see, Gail’s worried about “people convicted of violent offenses” walking around with concealed guns and police being unable to do anything about it. However, what she misses is that people with concealed carry permits? You know what they’re not? People convicted of violent offenses.

That’s right. You can’t get a permit if you have been convicted of a violent offense, and the background check process is more detailed for concealed carry permits in every single state than even the background check to buy a gun. It’s why the Sutherland Springs killer could buy a gun at a gun store, but not get a carry permit. It’s because the system works.

Further, people with concealed carry permits are the least likely individuals to commit a crime.

And this information is out there, so I’m left wondering if Gail Collins and people like her are just dumb, or if they’re willfully lying in the pages of the nation’s largest newspaper in order to sway people to their way of thinking. I mean, it’s possible they’re repeating someone else’s lies, of course, but that just puts them in the dumb camp. Do a little research for yourself, for crying out loud. Get both sides of the story. At least try and find out what the other side is saying.


At least then you’d know that no one wants violent criminals walking the streets with concealed firearms and that this bill won’t allow them to.

But that might blow the narrative away. Can’t have that.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member