Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,492 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

Why Did it Have to be … Guns? by L. Neil Smith

Over the past 30 years, I’ve been paid to write almost two million words, every one of which, sooner or later, came back to the issue of guns and gun-ownership. Naturally, I’ve thought about the issue a lot, and it has always determined the way I vote.

People accuse me of being a single-issue writer, a single-issue thinker, and a single-issue voter, but it isn’t true. What I’ve chosen, in a world where there’s never enough time and energy, is to focus on the one political issue which most clearly and unmistakably demonstrates what any politician — or political philosophy — is made of, right down to the creamy liquid center.

Make no mistake: all politicians — even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership — hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it’s an X-ray machine. It’s a Vulcan mind-meld. It’s the ultimate test to which any politician — or political philosophy — can be put.

If a politician isn’t perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash — for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything — without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn’t your friend no matter what he tells you.

If he isn’t genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody’s permission, he’s a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.

What his attitude — toward your ownership and use of weapons — conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn’t trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?

If he doesn’t want you to have the means of defending your life, do you want him in a position to control it?

If he makes excuses about obeying a law he’s sworn to uphold and defend — the highest law of the land, the Bill of Rights — do you want to entrust him with anything?

If he ignores you, sneers at you, complains about you, or defames you, if he calls you names only he thinks are evil — like “Constitutionalist” — when you insist that he account for himself, hasn’t he betrayed his oath, isn’t he unfit to hold office, and doesn’t he really belong in jail?

Sure, these are all leading questions. They’re the questions that led me to the issue of guns and gun ownership as the clearest and most unmistakable demonstration of what any given politician — or political philosophy — is really made of.

He may lecture you about the dangerous weirdos out there who shouldn’t have a gun — but what does that have to do with you? Why in the name of John Moses Browning should you be made to suffer for the misdeeds of others? Didn’t you lay aside the infantile notion of group punishment when you left public school — or the military? Isn’t it an essentially European notion, anyway — Prussian, maybe — and certainly not what America was supposed to be all about?

And if there are dangerous weirdos out there, does it make sense to deprive you of the means of protecting yourself from them? Forget about those other people, those dangerous weirdos, this is about you, and it has been, all along.

Try it yourself: if a politician won’t trust you, why should you trust him? If he’s a man — and you’re not — what does his lack of trust tell you about his real attitude toward women? If “he” happens to be a woman, what makes her so perverse that she’s eager to render her fellow women helpless on the mean and seedy streets her policies helped create? Should you believe her when she says she wants to help you by imposing some infantile group health care program on you at the point of the kind of gun she doesn’t want you to have?

On the other hand — or the other party — should you believe anything politicians say who claim they stand for freedom, but drag their feet and make excuses about repealing limits on your right to own and carry weapons? What does this tell you about their real motives for ignoring voters and ramming through one infantile group trade agreement after another with other countries?

Makes voting simpler, doesn’t it? You don’t have to study every issue — health care, international trade — all you have to do is use this X-ray machine, this Vulcan mind-meld, to get beyond their empty words and find out how politicians really feel. About you. And that, of course, is why they hate it.

And that’s why I’m accused of being a single-issue writer, thinker, and voter.

But it isn’t true, is it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,452 Posts
I have long been a single issue 2A voter. It's not that I am not concerned about other issues. It is that:
  • If we don't have our rights respected, all other issues fall by the wayside.
  • 2A protects our most fragile right. It is the right the politicians have to stick their necks out the most to support. If they can stand up for 2A, they can stand up for the rest.
  • 2A protects our most fundamental right. Without it, all the other rights can be taken away.
  • 2A protects the right that SCOTUS has been the most reluctant to support.
In short, 2A protects the weakest link in the chain to us being a free people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37,053 Posts
It comes down to "Rights" versus "likes and dislikes." Rights will always trump the latter. I'll take preservation of any of the amendments over promises to reel in spending.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
475 Posts
Single issue voter here as well. Other issues matter too, (to a degree), but for me - the 2nd Amendment issues are first and foremost for my decision making process regarding my vote.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,421 Posts
The article makes a lot of sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rock and Glock

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
34,311 Posts
Those whose opinions on the Second Amendment agree with mine also tend to agree with me on other issues. Essentially, it is a matter of self-reliance vs government reliance, self-determination vs submission to mandates and dictates, a spiritual/religious world view vs a secular humanist approach, taking care of myself vs being taken care of.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,710 Posts
Any politician who doesn't support the 2nd clearly and without ambiguity has an agenda that causes him to not want the populace armed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rock and Glock

·
Registered
Northwest Oregon
Joined
·
16,785 Posts
The Second Amendment is the protection clause for the other nine Amendments in the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights delineates pre-existing universal rights of all people anywhere.

One of my ancestors signed the Magna Carta. It is a family tradition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
227 Posts
It is a shame that an issue so simple sparks as it does.

For or against.
Are they for or against the freedoms granted to us by our Constitution and The Bill of Rights?
Non-negotiable.
No debate.

Paid for by blood and sacrifice.
Not by politicians.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,334 Posts
The problem I have found with single issue Politicians is they have no depth. Those that ran on the single platform of "Fix The Dam Roads" Have proven that they have very poor judgement on most any other issue. Those that run only on water rights Have proven again and again they have little interest in forest management. And those that run on an Environmental Plan don't usually have any interest in farming issues.
On the other hand Those that have in the past shown that they can manage diverse groups generally get my vote!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,703 Posts
Its sad to me that the last few election have been single voter issues often times ... Frankly my main worry with any cand is where they stand on the 2a .... Sad as frankly there is other parties I rather vote for in terms of work rights etc but cant as they want to ban guns ...

To think at a time in the USA one could walk to a hardwear store and buy a BAR or tommy gun and walk out no paperwork no ID nothing ..Where everone had a silencer even the pres as his rich neighbores in NY hatted him firing off his 30-30 so he put a silencer on it .. The only reason everone and there mum did not have a tommy gun was the price and we were a different country back then
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,089 Posts
I’m a single issue voter. Figured when a candidate is not just pro 2A but a 2A advocate then all other rights would be supported.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,567 Posts
That's all I vote for now. Without the second amendment, all is lost. Not particularly fond of Trump, never have been. He was the lesser of two evils. Waaay lesser. Would never call myself a republican, it's just that that's all I vote for. Another lesser of two evils. What is needed is a constitution party.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,421 Posts
With the current crop of politicians, it's really difficult to go to the election polling station. It's choose the least objectionable candidate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hasaf and Rabbit212
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top