Anti-Gun Columnist Thinks Some Of Our Guns 'Have To Go'

I really should be used to it by now. I’ve been in this game long enough to know that liberal anti-gun zealots are amazingly arrogant and horribly misinformed, all at the same time. That’s a horrible combination in the best of circumstances, but it gets outright annoying at a time like this when just days ago 17 high school kids were gunned down.


In this case, a liberal columnist thinks that some of our guns simply have to go, and we should just suck it up.

We keep having this argument after every atrocity where you claim that any frank discussion of the matter is politicizing a tragedy. Yet, mass shootings with the same type of military-inspired weaponry continues with increasing regularity and higher body counts. Your impassioned, but severely flawed, insistence that owning semi-automatic assault rifles and high capacity magazines is a sacred right is nothing more than a distorted interpretation of the intent of the Second Amendment.

Unfortunately, this is political, and we have got to talk about it right now.

Sorry, some of your guns have got to go. They are weapons of war that were designed solely to create massive casualties on the battlefield. They’re not practical for hunting or self-defense because they were designed for combat.

Sorry, your ownership of an assault weapon is not a legitimate stand against potential tyranny. If it ever came to that, you’re not going to win against highly trained law enforcement or the military. It’s a bogus argument that you use because owning an assault rifle gives you a delusional sense of power and control.

Also, that argument you love that other guns have the same features as your beloved AR-15, but just don’t look like assault weapons. Yeah, well, if that’s true- they need to go, too.

Sorry, people don’t need to be buying guns at gun shows. There should be longer waiting periods for purchases and more extensive background checks. Some people with certain types of mental illness shouldn’t be allowed to own guns. Everyone with a gun should have to have a license that needs periodic renewal and review. People with guns should have to purchase insurance. Child-locks should be mandatory. Gun-safety training should be a prerequisite to ownership


He drones on and on, and, in the process, shows us just how little he really understands the subject he’s talking about.

Take, for example, his comment, “If it ever came to that, you’re not going to win against highly trained law enforcement or the military.” For one thing, few actually want a civil war, but the thought that tyrannical oppression will be met with an armed response from the populace is something that has to play in every would-be oppressor’s mind.

Of course, what else do you expect from someone who tries to interpret the phrase “well-regulated” from the Second Amendment as justifying gun control? The fact that the Founding Fathers’ own writings prove that argument to be false shows just how little this guy understands the subject he’s taken it upon himself to pontificate on.

Frankly, I expected more from someone from Alabama. Then again, he’s a liberal. Why should I expect more?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member