Eventually, the president will overreach, signing an order for gun confiscation, euphemistically called, “mandatory buybacks.”  Antifa and their ilk will flood the streets in support of seizing these “weapons of war.”  Media will declare, “It’s the will of the people.”

And for the right, that will be the last straw (plastic or paper).

The left doesn’t understand that every gun owner is a single-issue-voter; millions will refuse to give up their guns.  And, many gun owners in this country will not go “meekly into the night,” there will be “rage” against what they will see as a usurpation of their constitutional rights. 

William L. Gensert
September 13, 2019
No Matter Who Wins in 2020, There Will Be Blood
[Via Matthew Bracken @Matt_Bracken.

He describes plausible scenarios. Prepare accordingly.—Joe]

The democrats will stop at nothing to push their agendas. I’d love to know how many acts of violence have been orchestrated by them to push gun control. I suspect the results would match our suspicions.

Red Nation Rising @RedNationRising
Tweeted on September 8, 2019
[Back in the late 1990s this was a common suspicion. I never heard anyone say they thought the shooter themselves planned it as a means to pass gun control bills. They mostly suspected it was some sort of mind control or “programming” of mentally unstable people. I thought it extremely unlikely.

The probabilities increased dramatically with the Las Vegas shooting. A rich, old, white guy was a different demographic than we had ever seen before. There was picture of the murderer at a Hillary rally wearing a vagina hat but there was little else to gives us clues as to his political persuasion or possible motivation. The expense, planning, and horrendous number of victims indicated something well beyond what other murderers had demonstrated.

Then there was another mass murder, I forget which one, with a manifesto explicitly advocating more gun control. There are no more probabilities. There is only certainty that it has happened. The questions are now, “How many times has it happened?” and “How many more times will it happen before we can put an end to, or dramatically reduce, their incredibly evil activities?”—Joe]

This is the 21st century; the firearms cat is out of the bag. If you want to use gun control to stop shootings, you need to reduce the nation to a sparsely populated Stone Age society.

Carl Bussjaeger
September 2 2019
Nasty, Brutish, and Short
[For the stated assumption this is true. But it’s not about stopping shootings. It’s about making the resistance of tyranny difficult. Certain types of gun control, such as successful gun registration, can accomplish that.

The obvious conclusion is that those insisting on gun control which has no possibility of stopping the mass shootings must have an incredibly evil agenda as their real goal.—Joe]

Evidently the five senators signing onto this brief are terrified that the nation’s high court is about to examine the extreme nature of local gun control laws and their constitutionality under the Second Amendment.

Instead of the Supreme Court dismissing the case we believe the court should reject the amicus brief. It is an insult to the court’s integrity, and to the Constitution, itself.

Contrary to what the Whitehouse Five contends in their brief, the nation needs the Supreme Court to take Second Amendment cases and determine whether laws such as the one in New York are infringements, and then provide guidance to the lower courts about where the constitutional line may be drawn.

Alan Gottlieb
August 30, 2019
SAF APPLAUDS SENATE REPUBLICANS FOR CONDEMNING DEM. THREAT TO HIGH COURT
[Dismissing the brief… Hmmm… I kind of like that. But I wonder, without further justification, if that would be unconstitutional in some way?—Joe]