New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy isn’t a fan of the Second Amendment. Since he’s been in office, I can’t think of a single gun control measure he’s opposed in any way, shape, or form. Based on some proposals that have come out of the state, it’s pretty obvious that he doesn’t think you or I should have the right to defend ourselves from violent attacks.
Yet over at American Thinker, they make a good point about just how much of a hypocrite Murphy is when it comes to guns.
New Jersey governor Phil Murphy is a garden-variety progressive Democrat of privilege who has freely admitted to his ignorance of the Bill of Rights and has often adopted the disastrous policies of his New York counterparts rather than think through the consequences to his own state; for example, the COVID nursing-home scandal, emptying jails, and free money and welfare programs for illegal immigrants. In December, Murphy latched on to Hochul’s post-Bruen CCW restrictions, enacting the same list of barred locations that add on to an already existing regulatory burden of multiple background investigations and approvals, mandatory training, ammunition limits, waiting periods, and storage requirements for home and transport that puts locked and unloaded weapons out of an owner’s reach during a critical need for self-defense. Permit fees are now skyrocketing in the Garden State, and new liability insurance requirements will have a disparate impact upon low-income residents, creating for them an economic deprivation of their Second Amendment rights in populated areas and urban settings where self-defense against violent crime sees its most acute need.
Governor Murphy gives little public recognition to this effective law-enforcement program as it would fluff the sails of his effort to impose heavy-handed gun controls on lawful residents. In his fanaticism to harass legal gun owners, he also conveniently ignores federal studies showing that ninety percent of the weapons used in crimes are obtained illegally, either through theft or off the black market.
A well-armed, Secret Service-trained, state police executive protection unit meticulously protects the public and private life and movements of Phil Murphy and his family. They are with him and the First Lady day and night, whether on the road, in the governor’s mansion, or vigilantly camped overnight outside his 9.5 million dollar Monmouth County estate. They shadow Murphy’s children on shopping treks, nights out, and during their school days at private academies. Despite his Wall Street wealth, enlarged in 2021 by a five million dollar surge in his stock portfolio, taxpayers still foot the bill when the detail is dragged along on holiday vacations to Tanzania, extended stays at his $7.3 million dollar, 23-room Umbrian villa in central Italy, or at his more modest home in Berlin.
In other words, Murphy feels he and his should have all the protection provided by guns while you shouldn’t.
This isn’t overly surprising. We’ve long known that anti-gunners aren’t really anti-gun so much as anti-you having a gun. They’re more than accepting of certain parties being armed, just so long as those parties are ones they approve of.
In this case, Murphy is basically saying that you don’t deserve to be able to protect yourself, but he does.
Far too many so-called elites legitimately seem to believe that if you can’t outsource your security, you don’t deserve to be safe.
Now, understand that as a public figure, Murphy is more likely to be the target of an attack than your average individual.
However, Murphy needs to understand that more average Americans are attacked and killed each day than public officials. While we regular folks aren’t as likely to be targeted, a lot more of us are dying each day to violent crime.
And that doesn’t even take into account all the attacks that don’t result in homicide, but well could have.
Murphy’s opposition to things like concealed carry for average citizens while insisting on having a security detail protect not just him but his family at taxpayer expense is, in fact, a supreme act of hypocrisy. If guns are useful for keeping him and his safe, then why is it a problem for those of us who aren’t able to outsource our personal protection?
That’s a question Murphy simply won’t answer.