A lot of gun rights advocates are concerned about the deal struck by a bipartisan group of senators recently. After all, there are some serious issues with this deal, such as things like the red flag law provisions and the so-called boyfriend loophole.

But Rep. Fred Upton wants us to believe that we have nothing at all to be concerned about.

Republican Michigan Rep. Fred Upton tried to downplay the concerns of Second Amendment advocates over new gun control legislation while speaking on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday.

Host Dana Bash asked whether it’s possible Congress would strike a deal on gun control before the impending recess.

“I want to turn to guns. A bipartisan group in the Senate is trying to lock down a compromise deal, but funding for state red flag laws and eliminating the so-called ‘boyfriend loophole’ do remain sticking points for Republicans. Congress leaves for recess in a week. Do you think a deal is still gettable?” Bash asked.

Upton said he thinks a deal is still possible before recess, but the two “sticking points” are “common sense.”

“Law abiding folks shouldn’t have any fears in terms of what’s going on. It’s been a rallying point, particularly for the NRA and Gun Owners of America. You look at their website and they’re raising cash like you wouldn’t believe in terms of, ‘their Second Amendment rights are being taken away.’”

Good to know the gentleman from Michigan can be so nonchalant about our Second Amendment rights being curtailed.

Especially when law-abiding folks have plenty to be concerned about.

For example, red flag laws can result in someone’s guns being taken away simply because one party claims the other is a threat, the kind of claim that doesn’t require any evidence to speak of. In fact, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf recently put out a tweet that he thought would defend red flag laws but does quite the opposite.

So yeah, law-abiding gun owners have something to be concerned about here.

Then there’s the so-called boyfriend loophole that seeks to expand the list of people who are prohibited from buying guns in such a way that it can turn any simple assault into a domestic violence claim. Since even grabbing someone’s arm can be considered assault, we’re definitely going to have a problem here.

And that can happen easily enough–or, more accurately, be claimed to have happened easily enough–that who only knows how many people will be deprived of their gun rights because of something that shouldn’t even be on the radar.

Upton is free to believe there’s nothing for law-abiding gun owners to fear in this deal, but he’s deluding himself.

That’s his right, of course. He can delude himself all he wants.

What he doesn’t get to do is try to gaslight us into believing in that exact same delusion. We’re not interested in playing that game, especially when it comes to our right to keep and bear arms.

We already know how that delusion will ultimately play out for us.