The New Republic – by Matt Ford
Last month, Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke proposed a modest solution to the relentless tide of mass shootings: a mandatory buyback program for every AR-15 in the country. The View co-host Meghan McCain responded with a dire warning. “The AR-15 is by far the most popular gun in America, by far,” she told her fellow panelists. “I was just in the middle of nowhere Wyoming, if you’re talking about taking people’s guns from them, there’s going to be a lot of violence.”
Tucker Carlson echoed McCain’s blood-soaked sentiment on his Tuesday night broadcast. “So, this is—what you are calling for is civil war,” he said. “What you are calling for is an incitement to violence. It’s something I wouldn’t want to live here when that happened, would you? I’m serious.” Erick Erickson, a prominent conservative columnist, also warned of tragedy. “I know people who keep AR-15’s buried because they’re afraid one day the government might come for them,” he wrote on Twitter. “I know others who are stockpiling them. It is not a stretch to say there’d be violence if the [government] tried to confiscate them.”
“There would be violence” neatly elides what’s actually being claimed: Some gun-rights activists would murder government officials who try to enforce a duly passed law. This isn’t an extreme viewpoint among such gun enthusiasts. If anything, it’s one of their central tenets.
Let’s examine the hypothetical scenario in which something akin to O’Rourke’s proposal gets enacted. First, Democrats capture the White House and the Senate in next year’s election. Second, they pass a federal law that requires mandatory buybacks of AR-15s and other semiautomatic rifles. Third, the Supreme Court narrowly upholds the law’s constitutionality, perhaps with Chief Justice John Roberts casting the fifth vote to save it on narrow grounds. This sequence of events is slightly improbable. Then again, so were the events that led to Donald Trump becoming president.
Who, then, would gun-rights supporters murder in response? Would it be the lawmakers who passed the law? Would it be the judges who rejected legal challenges to it? Would it be the president who championed the initiative on the campaign trail and spent political capital to make it a reality? Perhaps the activists, such as the parents of children killed at Sandy Hook and the teenagers who saw their classmates die in Parkland, would be targeted. The civil servants tasked with implementing the buyback program might have to face this grave danger. So would the cops who come knocking on doors, looking for unaccounted AR-15s.
This insurrectionist message is not new. Sharron Angle, a far-right Nevada politician, implied that gun-rights advocates might turn violent against Democrats during her 2010 race against then–Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. “I feel that the Second Amendment is the right to keep and bear arms for our citizenry,” she explained during a radio interview in 2010. “This not for someone who’s in the military. This not for law enforcement. This is for us. And in fact when you read that Constitution and the founding fathers, they intended this to stop tyranny. This is for us when our government becomes tyrannical.”
The host interjected to suggest that America might be headed that way. “If we needed it at any time in history, it might be right now,” he said. “Well it’s to defend ourselves,” Angle continued. “And you know, I’m hoping that we’re not getting to Second Amendment remedies. I hope the vote will be the cure for the Harry Reid problems.” Her inflammatory remarks, combined with other controversial stances, helped Reid win reelection that year even as Republicans toppled numerous Democrats a wave election across the country.
Joe Walsh, a former Illinois representative, also invoked the prospect of violence on the eve of the 2016 election. “On November 8th, I’m voting for Trump,” he wrote on Twitter shortly before Election Day. “On November 9th, if Trump loses, I’m grabbing my musket. You in?” When CNN anchor Jake Tapper asked him to clarify what he meant, Walsh said he meant “protesting” and “participating in acts of civil disobedience”—two actions where people bearing muskets are typically rare. Walsh now opposes Trump and launched a putative primary challenge against him last month; it’s unclear whether he’ll grab a musket if he loses.
There is usually a strong taboo against discussing the potential assassination of major American political figures. One out of every eleven U.S. presidents has been murdered in office, and Barack Obama’s historic presidency only amplified those quiet fears. In recent years, however, that sentiment has become less politically toxic in right-wing circles. President Donald Trump once hypothesized on the campaign trail that gun-rights proponents would kill Hillary Clinton if she took office. “If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks,” he told a booing crowd in North Carolina in August 2016. “Although the Second Amendment people—maybe there is, I don’t know.”
Though Trump received ample criticism for the remark, it was essentially a blunter version of a popular gun-rights talking point. “The Second Amendment to the Constitution isn’t for just protecting hunting rights, and it’s not only to safeguard your right to target practice,” Texas Senator Ted Cruz remarked during his presidential campaign in 2015. “It is a constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny—for the protection of liberty.” The implication then, as now, is that Americans can simply shoot their elected officials if they get out of hand.
One problem (among many) with this point is that not everyone agrees on what constitutes tyranny. Those who identify with Antifa, the leaderless left-wing movement that confronts far-right protesters with physical force, would argue that they are working to hinder the rise of fascist movements inside the United States. It’s hard to think of a more iconic modern example of tyranny than fascism. Cruz, however, is unpersuaded. Last month, he introduced a bill to have Antifa declared a domestic terrorist organization. Perhaps black-bloc protesters would have won his sympathy if they used semiautomatic rifles instead of milkshakes.
Indeed, some of the far-right gunmen who carried out massacres in recent years have argued that they were acting to prevent some form of tyranny, even if they didn’t use that exact word. The El Paso gunman slaughtered shoppers at a local Walmart last month to prevent what he called a “Hispanic invasion of the United States,” which he said would lead to a “one-party state.”
In February, federal investigators arrested a Coast Guard lieutenant who allegedly stockpiled guns and ammunition as part of a plot to assassinate Trump’s political opponents and prevent his possible impeachment. Among his purported targets were Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and multiple Democratic presidential candidates. “The defendant intends to murder innocent civilians on a scale rarely seen in this country,” federal prosecutors warned a federal judge when they asked to detain him pending trial. So would gun-rights activists, apparently, if President Beto O’Rourke or President Elizabeth Warren attempted to ban some types of semiautomatic rifles.
It’s debatable whether even the most stringent gun-control measures would prevent mass shootings, and it’s doubtful that those measures would survive the Roberts Court’s scrutiny. But time and time again, these proposals reveal a troubling window into the mindset of the gun-rights activists who oppose them. That, in turn, only makes the case for enacting such measures much stronger. If the main reason you need an AR-15 is to murder civil servants and elected officials, you shouldn’t have it in the first place.
https://newrepublic.com/article/154931/conservatives-well-spill-blood-keep-guns
I really don’t think the government would GAF about a civil war more of us dead
What they don’t want and are scared of and dare not say it is the f!@king Revolution this act will land on their asses
( a lot of people get this wrong
A civil war is US national against US national
A Revolution is We the people against these jack holes that have infiltrated and subjugated our true form of government as in we over throw our government) that’s why you don’t hear politicians utter that word
Yeah No one is going to go after their neighbor or guy down the street , or a brother
We’re coming for you communist bastards that should leave this country and Republic before you can’t
Exactly this is how the communist propagandist work. Obviously we don’t have our heads up our rears, but this is how they twist things against our own interest.
Holy crap! This is the goofiest article! I want NOTHING to do with this “New Republic” which is the name of the site this article came from.
Obviously this writer does NOT know his Bill of Rights from a hole in the ground, nor the purpose of the unalienable right to any sort of weapon one chooses.
The most important difference between a revolution and a civil war is that civilians directly revolt against the government in a revolution whereas factions wage a war against each other in a civil war.
Ask yourself which one you really see and want to have happen
Than you’ll realize why they won’t say it
BINGO! They’ll only offer solutions that benefit THEM and REVOLUTION is the dirty “R” word they REFUSE to use. ALWAYS civil war, as that will benefit them.
“Who, then, would gun-rights supporters murder in response? Would it be the lawmakers who passed the law? Would it be the judges who rejected legal challenges to it? Would it be the president who championed the initiative on the campaign trail and spent political capital to make it a reality? Perhaps the activists, such as the parents of children killed at Sandy Hook and the teenagers who saw their classmates die in Parkland, would be targeted. The civil servants tasked with implementing the buyback program might have to face this grave danger. So would the cops who come knocking on doors, looking for unaccounted AR-15s.”
It’s not called “murder”, idiot. It’s called exacting justice for committing TREASON! I like your list though. Pretty accurate.
Children and teenagers died at Sandy Hook and Parkland? Funny all I saw was a gaggle of crisis actors and traitors.
You lost me at “modest”.
Eata d!k!
A war is when the government tells us who the enemy is. A revolution is when we figure it out for ourselves.
A revolution is to replace a government with another government, as is a civil war.
What we are about to participate in is a straight up uprising to enforce the rightful ratified law in the Bill of Rights and remove a foreign occupation.
Tick, Tick, Tick, Tick…
When the people fear the Government you have Tyranny. When the Government fears the people you have freedom!
A gun confiscation is a “modest” proposal????? Maybe in DC, San Fran and NYC……..
Ironically a gun confiscation will be Them taking Our weapons at Gun Point………………
“Ironically a gun confiscation will be Them taking Our weapons at Gun Point………………”
These criminals may come and try to force their way into our homes in order to steal our property, but all they are going to TAKE is lead.
“I know others who are stockpiling them. It is not a stretch to say there’d be violence if the [government] tried to confiscate them.”
They’re getting away with it so far.
One at a time… Red Flag Laws.
They’ll hit the wrong folks, sooner or later.
ME NEXT!!
ME NEXT!!!!!!
They never miss a chance to promote these staged shootings where NO ONE DIES, do they? No one can provide a hospital record, a Death Certificate, “I was shot twice in the back by an AK47, but one week later I’ doing interviews 2000 miles away” ??
Please show me these woulds. Those I’ve seen ‘hit twice in the back with a 7.62 round’ – IF they even survived – were in a hospital for several months.
No one could find a real D/C for Sandy Hoax, Parkland, Vegas, SB, etc. But PLEASE! Tell us a story, Uncle Sam!?
.
I know someone who took 2 in the back and one in the back of the head in Vietnam. They toe-tagged him but he must’ve groaned or something because they shipped him back stateside. Was in a coma for 6 months!
Agreed, ain’t ONE of the “shootings” they concocted anywhere close to being “real”.
My take on this dreck! First off I agree with Katie, this is a goofy fkn written piece of shit article.
Second, this thing we call the government is not our government..! That is a fact and cannot be debated. it is too easy to prove otherwise.
With that stated, nothing this government does or claims and no matter who the players are has any legitimacy to it whatsoever. it is all FRAUD from the beginning.
to debate or respond to this preposterous rambling in this article is to give it some sort of intellectual weight of which it has none.
My response is to state the obvious to anyone in the know or paying attention. We are so fkn far past the starting point with any of this shit it makes the blood boil.
This Jew puppet BETO-Orourke and the Trumpraeli crew should all be charged with outright naked treason and hung swiftly…
but alas we have no system in place that allows such, any of us could go find some court and file a charge against them, let me know when you find such a court and a system in place to enforce our natural and republic rights, I will happily go file.
and please everybody let us stop using the term of the fkn communist droolers, “Revolution” Henry has clarified this for us, we will engage in righteous “Rebellion” against our enemies….we will restore our republic and our common law system back to the people from where it was stolen.
If you have questions, ask yourself, how this Beto homo-rat fuk could have stated what he stated on this clown show known as the Democratic Debates, and “Not be arrested and charged with Naked Treason for advocating the removal of one of our sacred articles.
DTTNWO and all who support it..
Even the NRA spokes boy, Colion Noir came out today and said almost everything i had in my thoughts after watching that POS Beto-boy.
That says a lot…I’m sure the NRA (A gun control organization by all definitions) will reign him in a bit, but he’s real popular, being a well spoken black man, conservative republican, still a true believer…..
Anyhow, this stupid article ends with this, “That, in turn, only makes the case for enacting such measures much stronger. If the main reason you need an AR-15 is to murder civil servants and elected officials, you shouldn’t have it in the first place”.
I put forth and I am in great company with the true founders of this American Nation, that, it is specific to the reason why we need all terrible implements of the soldier, which is to dispatch the enforcers of tyranny at all levels, especially the suits, especially people who claim to have authority and position and title and would order others to go forth and enforce their criminal edicts upon the innocent people at large.
Guns, Knives, Swords….all but effective tools against all forms of tyranny… with a sharpened butter-knife we can obtain all the arms we will need, remember that…
This is all theater for the pablum eating public……they are putting in their red flag BS just to have some sort of authority to act on, so your average LE’s will go out and die for them….they intend to attack us on multiple fronts, one being a new world war of some sorts, real and faux terrorism at many levels….
this is going to get ugly, and don’t think that some of these little homo maggots like Beto don’t fantasize about putting on a little Hup Hup uniform and tagging along on some patriot kills…
Watch The Checkist and remember that shit, they have a modern version planned for us. Let us not go quietly into the night gentlemen and fellow women “Real Patriots”…
God bless, God speed, we haven’t been waiting for nothing…it begins much sooner than later I would bet. They are chomping at the bit to do an Australia style confiscation here….Drooling more likely.
How vial and disgusting our fellow Americans have become, but as we have awoken and have arrived here, we must try to continue to awaken others as much as possible….our great, great grandparents should have handled this shit a long time ago, so, now it has fallen into our laps, what will we do? Will we passively pass this on to our children and grandchildren too… ?
Will another Globalist engineered War make us stand down and cheer on the fake military hero warriors like took place with our parents….? how much longer will we let these subhumans continue to manipulate us and our freedom?
There can never be a discussion or a debate about any of our sacrosanct rights….! To do so, is the highest level of treason against a free people and every individual who is an American. Anyone who does so or ever does so in the future, shall be hanged with prejudice, after having been charged and tried for such crimes, and adjudicated from a jury of their peers. This is our law, this is our way and this must stand again. or all is lost.
Norm