The gun control groups haven't really brought their "A" game of late, have they? From Brady's freak out about less-lethal weapons to Giffords losing their minds over national reciprocity, they're not exactly making our jobs difficult. And let's not forget about Everytown's pathetic talking points for Thanksgiving.
But Giffords' freak-out still had the NRA's America's 1st Freedom ready to rip their entire argument to shreds.
“If Congress passes a national concealed carry mandate, anyone you see could have a gun on them—and the police would be powerless to protect you … ,” claims the post.
First, it is interesting that they refer to this proposed legislation as a mandate, as if it would become mandatory to carry a gun. But then, that is likely a slip from a person who has not properly learned to use the English language—a recent college graduate from an American university, perhaps.
Next, the claim that the “police would be powerless to protect you” juts out, as it is clumsy fearmongering. It is also a lie stacked on a few more lies.
Allow me to explain: First, there is a lie here in the insinuation that this isn’t already the case (and that it has been since the Founding period and before); actually, all a national reciprocity bill would do is prevent local and state governments from preventing law-abiding citizens to carry their Second Amendment freedoms with them as they move about in areas that allow lawful concealed carry. Such a federal law would not enable someone to carry concealed in places that have local bans or other restrictions.
Also noted in the piece is how groups like Brady have sworn that laws like constitutional carry would result in Wild West-like shootouts every other day, and it simply hasn't happened.
They fearmonger because it's handy to their cause. After all, the facts aren't nearly as on their side as they might like people to believe, which means they have to use emotion to try and drive political change. Scared people are willing to accept all kinds of restrictions on their freedoms that others wouldn't.
Just look at what people not only tolerated but demanded during the pandemic. They're more than willing to accept anything if they're scared enough.
And Giffords tried to do just that.
The problem is, they suck at it. America's 1st Freedom editor-in-chief Frank Miniter, who wrote the above, notes that the character limit on X can make people reveal what they might not otherwise. After all, with just 280 characters, you include the ones that matter most, and this fearmongering attempt to sway people tells you a lot.
Miniter argues they don't trust you.
I'm not sure I agree entirely. I think they don't trust themselves. They're the ones who keep saying all these bad things will happen, and I'm inclined to believe it's due to projection. They don't trust themselves with guns, so they don't trust you with them because they know they shouldn't be trusted with guns.
They're the danger, and they can't accept that you aren't.
National reciprocity won't do anything except remove a few barriers to carrying in other states. It'll especially be beneficial for those who have to travel to very anti-gun states that make it difficult or impossible to get an out-of-state permit. It'll mean I can take my family to California for vacation and not have to trust that police will just happen to be around all the time, for example.
It won't make people carry. It won't suddenly allow me to carry in all 50 states, with only Georgia's list of off-limits places applying. It won't let convicted felons carry in various states just because they want to. It won't do any of that.
But Giffords doesn't want you to do it because they don't trust themselves with that chance.
