Kirsten Gillibrand’s Misguided Gun Control Argument
caret-downdownloadfacebook2rss2searchtwitteryoutube

Kirsten Gillibrand’s Misguided Gun Control Argument

I’m not going to talk about the recent mass shooting, because instead, I want to talk about all mass shootings.

Every child in a classroom, every pedestrian on the street, every member of a church, mosque, or synagogue praying…I’m talking every person unjustly murdered by madmen.

No acts of violence are ever an excuse to limit the natural rights and freedoms of law-abiding, innocent people.

Recently, Democratic presidential candidate and New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand unleashed a fiery argument after the mass shooting in Christchurch, New Zealand, advocating for more firearm laws including universal background checks for all firearms sales in the United States.

It’s hard to debate someone whose entire argument consists of statements that are factually incorrect.  At one point, the Senator claimed American gun manufacturers make assault weapons which they then plan to sell “to a teenager in a Wal-Mart.”  

The federal government outlawed the manufacturing and sales of fully automatic firearms decades ago by passing the National Firearms Act.

Moreover, no gun manufacturer or lobby has ever suggested selling guns to anyone on the terror watch list, however many do in fact question the validity of Democrat  “no-fly, no-buy” legislation since it would restrict the access to firearms of people who haven’t been convicted of a crime.

Representative John Lewis of Georgia was on that list during the civil rights movement for political reasons. Martin Luther King Jr. was also on a no-fly list because of his political activities, which is why he was denied a concealed carry permit.  As commentator Larry Keane at Ammoland recently stated, Kirsten Gillibrand is entitled to her opinions, but “not entitled to her own facts.”

Throughout history have used systems like this to coerce the populace, disarm them, and then inflict violence on an unarmed people. American history has shown a well-armed population is essential to liberty, and in the past century access to firearms benefited black Americans during the Jim Crow era, allowed for the peaceful return to law and order in Athens, Tennessee during a political coup, and many other examples.

Kirsten Gillibrand is entitled to her beliefs, but the right to effective self-defense is vital to the preservation of liberty.

Comment section

2 thoughts on “Kirsten Gillibrand’s Misguided Gun Control Argument

  1. Gillibrand was vocally pro-gun and NRA A-rated when she was an upstate NY legislator. When she was elected to federal office, she discovered that she couldn’t sit at the Democrat cool kids’ table until she did a 180° and became a vocal gun-banner.

    Gillibrand recently proposed limiting opioid prescriptions to a seven-day max, to which Twitter users immediately responded, “My body, my choice” — the very motto Gillibrand herself had recently used to oppose federal abortion restrictions. Her hypocrisy is obvious, even to Democrats.

    Gillilbrand has no principles, other than to do what is necessary to get Gillibrand elected and re-elected.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *