28 November 2014

Not All Anti-Gunners Willing to Wait for Slippery Slope

Not All Anti-Gunners Willing to Wait for Slippery Slope

By Kurt Hofmann, November 26th, 2014
JPFO writer contributor, © 2014.

Picture, Oleg Volk

To hear most proponents of "gun control" tell it, those of us who warn that the anti-gun agenda's endpoint is a total ban of private gun ownership are "paranoid" to believe such a thing. President Obama has himself made this claim:

"Part of the challenge we confront is that even the slightest hint of some sensible, responsible legislation in this area fans this notion that somehow, 'Here it comes, everybody's guns are going to be taken away,'"Obama said.
Of course Obama's idea of "sensible, responsible legislation" includes an outright ban of the most popular centerfire rifles in the country, mandating the inclusion of "smart gun" technology (just don't even get me started) in semi-automatic handguns, banning private sales of guns, etc. Beyond that, though, every new restrictive gun law enacted becomes the beachhead from which the next infringement on that which shall not be infringed is launched--the proverbial "slippery slope" in action.

Gerald Ensley
For some gun ban zealots, though, the slippery slope simply cannot be counted upon to act quickly enough--they want their gun bans now. Gerald Ensley, writing for the Tallahassee Democrat, is just such a zealot, as he makes clear in his "Stop the insanity: Ban guns":

I'm not talking about gun control. I'm not talking about waiting periods and background checks.

I'm talking about flat-out banning the possession of handguns and
assault rifles by individual citizens. I'm talking about repealing or
amending the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Follow the link to read the rest. And a h/t to B.P. and others who brought this to my attention before the JPFO wrote about it.


Well Seasoned Fool said...

I do admire Ensley for advocating the repeal of the 2nd Amendment. I don't agree for many reasons, but his approach is honest and forthright as opposed to the usual underhanded gun grabber tactics.

Tewshooz said...

Well, while we're at it, let's take away his first amendment right to free speech.

Rev. Paul said...

WSF, that's true enough, but I'm strangely reluctant to pat him on the back too strongly. :)

Tewshooz, quite right: if one amendment's vulnerable, they all are.

Murphy's Law said...

If they really want to fight that fight, let it start here.

Guffaw in AZ said...

Naw, they wouldn't do THAT?
(see Connecticut, Massachusetts et al)



PS - I'm all about 'reasonable dissent and protest'. Having said that, let's all chip in for a one-way ticket for Ensley - to say China, or N. Korea.

Rev. Paul said...

ML, it's probably coming to that. The only question is when.

gfa, he's welcome to live in the socialist hellhole of his choosing ... and yep, I'm down with that "chipping in" thing.