Anti-Gunners Continue Pushing Police Issues As Gun Issues

Anti-Gunners Continue Pushing Police Issues As Gun Issues

Gun rights are a fundamental part of the American experience. The Bill of Rights protects some very specific rights for Americans, rights that shouldn’t need protection but clearly do. After all, they’re trampled on in every other nation on Earth.

One of those rights is expressed in the Second Amendment: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the people’s right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” In other words, our right to own arms–regardless of what form they might take–is protected as being essential to our nation’s security.

Yet anti-gunners continually reject that.

Today, we have a writer over at The New Republic trying to blame police excesses and brutality on the Second Amendment.

Law enforcement has been infected by America’s gun culture, as Derek Thompson has recently argued in The Atlantic. “[C]elebrating widespread gun ownership,” he writes, “makes it all but inevitable that the United States has more armed police than similarly rich countries, more panicky officers, more adversarial police encounters, more officer shootings, and more civilian killings.”

Underscoring this domestic arms race, a larger philosophical issue looms: Police have adopted the same fundamental societal outlook as gun rights advocates: Arms are synonymous with law and order. Whatever process of public safety reform may await the United States, a radical reform of gun culture must be part of the conversation.

Consider how our gun culture makes American society needlessly treacherous, for police and citizens alike. The U.S. lacks the most basic of firearms regulations: universal background checks on all gun purchases and transfers. In the absence of such constraints, gun rights advocates have promoted laws enabling armed citizens to carry their guns in public—and, in many states, shielding them from criminal and civil liabilities for causing damage to people and property.

Oh, that last paragraph is a doozy, ain’t it? What a blatant misrepresentation.

Those laws simply bar people from being sued for the lawful use of a weapon, particularly in self-defense. What it means is that if I am forced to shoot someone to protect my life, neither he nor his family can file a lawsuit against me for having shot him in self-defense. There’s no state in the nation that prevents people from being sued for damages resulting from an unlawful shooting.

Yet the writer doesn’t frame it that way. He doesn’t see it that way.

Meanwhile, he’s pretending that the issues we currently have with police are solely the result of our gun culture. Nevermind that guns aren’t new and have been a part of our national landscape for as long as that landscape has existed. Nevermind that the reason departments have stepped up their armament was because of the actions of criminals, not law-abiding citizens. Criminals, it should be noted, that can’t lawfully own guns in the first place.

See, the writer, Firmin DeBrabander, is ready to cast every evil he sees as being the result of guns.

Yet, who does he want to turn to in order to disarm people? Who does he want to trust to be the sole holder of firearms in his Utopian version of this country? That’s right, the police.

He wants to empower them to raid people’s homes with red flag orders and to determine who gets to exercise a fundamental right. He wants to empower these same police officers to have even more control and more of a monopoly on the use of force so that you and I can’t defend ourselves effectively, all while decrying these very same police officers.

Sorry, but I’m not buying it.

This is nothing more than anti-gun opportunism.

Anti-gunners know they’re losing ground. The recent riots following months of lockdown due to the pandemic and the runs on guns these events triggered have put gun control on its butt. Millions of people found out about the lies they’ve been fed by people like DeBrabander for years. They found out that no, you can’t buy a gun on the internet and that in many places, it’s not that easy to buy a gun at all.

Because of that, they’re worried. They know that all the headway they made following Parkland is slipping away, so they have to do something.

That something is to try and paint police abuses as if they’re related to the Second Amendment in some pathetic hope that people will latch on to that.

They’re also hoping you won’t recognize that criminals already have guns and they are the ones using them on police, not the law-abiding citizens who will be impacted by gun control laws.