Be sure you are signed up for JPFO's periodical Email Alerts.
JOIN JPFO TODAY
Get a very aggressive defense of your rights.
Click on the above.
Help us avoid errors.
Should you prefer a full page of JPFO’s main links, then
Read these classic
rebuttals to "Gun Control"
Picture, Oleg Volk
Writing for Salon, Rick Perlstein throws away any pretense of journalistic objectivity with his headline: "Gun nuts are terrorizing America: The watershed moment everyone missed." He begins with the government's ignominious retreat from the armed standoff that they had initiated with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and the Oath Keepers, militia members, and "Three Percenters" who stood with him:
What Perlstein doesn't mention, but undoubtedly knows, is that if the armed federal muscle had not backed off, the only other option would have been a bloody battle. Killing in wholesale numbers, over a dispute about where cows eat. This guy wants the government to go into combat against American citizens, very possibly igniting civil war, and has the audacity to claim that it's the "gun nuts" who "are terrorizing America."
This opposition to the notion of "federal government über alles," Perlstein argues, is also illustrated by the popularity "on the right" of the slogan "molon labe," harking back to King Leonidas I's defiant challenge to the mighty Persian army's demand that he lay down his arms: "Come and take them."
That attitude, in turn, he claims, motivated the Las Vegas cop-killing couple, who, he tells us, were "inspired by their stint at the Bundy ranch," not bothering to acknowledge that this "stint" was cut rather short, when they were turned away without ever having been admitted entrance onto Bundy land.
Perlstein argues that this attitude is nothing new. What has changed, he tells us, is that Democrats ("we," in Perlstein's parlance) now allow it. In that, this notion that the government must regulate viewpoints, he sounds much like Hillary Clinton. According to Perlstein, evidently, if Democrats more aggressively pursued "gun control," people would be less inclined to resist government overreach:
He then goes on to lament the supposed lowering of ambitions of anti-gun Democrats since then (as if banning so-called "assault weapons," and prohibiting private sales, as the Democrat platform still calls for, are excessively modest goals, rather than intolerable infringements on that which shall not be infringed).
So now, armed private citizens are asserting their own power as citizens, because Democrats are not telling us not to with adequate volume
Perlstein exhibits a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation. "Gun nuts" (that's you, me, and everyone else who will fight to keep the palladium of liberty) will not be pacified by more aggressive forcible citizen disarmament efforts.
Such efforts will indeed be the most efficient way of forcing today's cultural cold war to go hot. Presumably, that's not what he wants.
Interestingly, Susie Madrak, writing for "Crooks and Liars" (which sounds like a good place for her), does seem to see the civil war implications of Perlstein's position--and seems to think he's onto something anyway:
Do what you think you gotta do, Susie, but you're going to need a bigger drone.
A former paratrooper, Kurt Hofmann was paralyzed in a car accident in 2002. The helplessness inherent to confinement to a wheelchair prompted him to explore armed self-defense, only to discover that Illinois denies that right, inspiring him to become active in gun rights advocacy. He also writes the St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner column. Kurt Hofmann Archive.