The National Rifle Association has a long record of defending the rights of every American to own firearms of any type and to carry them everywhere. It’s an agenda that enriches the NRA’s financial backers in the weapons trade, but endangers millions of citizens.
Now there is a new effort to restrict access to guns that would ordinarily get the NRA riled up in opposition. It follows the recent standoff at the Cliven Bundy ranch in Nevada where the Bureau of Land Management sought to hold Bundy accountable for violating the law and refusing to pay customary grazing fees for his cattle. In response to the BLM’s efforts to enforce the law, Bundy issued threats, saying that he had guns and was willing to use them. He was backed up by heavily armed militia members who stormed in to confront the BLM.
This is the backdrop for a legislative proposal by Utah Republican Chris Stewart who has analyzed the situation and concluded that there were too many guns in the mix and that steps must be taken by the federal government to disarm — the law enforcement officers.
Be Sure To “LIKE” News Corpse On Facebook
That’s right, unaccountable, and likely unstable, shady characters, who dashed across the country to defend a racist criminal, must be permitted unrestricted access to guns and munitions, even when they threaten to use them against their own government. But it’s the government agents who need to be relieved of their firearms. That’s the lesson that Stewart learned from the Bundy ranch episode.
This is where the NRA would usually step in and declare that anyone who wants to take away guns will have to “pry them from my cold, dead hands.” However, it seems that that sentiment only applies to lawless posses and murderers who were standing their ground. When it comes to the first responders who uphold the law and keep America safe, at great personal risk, the NRA has no principles or sympathy.
Shameless self-promotion…
Get Fox Nation vs. Reality. Available now at Amazon.
It is not surprising to find this sort of hypocrisy by the NRA-theists who are opposed to even the most common sense reforms that the American people favor by large majorities. But it is surprising to find that a sitting Republican representative can observe the disturbing events at the Bundy ranch and come away believing that it’s our law enforcement officers who should be disarmed.
Okay … this is ‘wayyyy beyond NUTZ! What a sad sad CRAZY country we are becoming.
It’s official, the inmates are now running the asylum. He’s obviously pandering to the voters who he assumes will support him when he’s up for re-election. Of course if I was a police officer I doubt I’d vote for him or even come to his aid if he was a victim of a crime.
your focus is obviously flawed and biased in this article and I take exception to this. Even in your opening you flagrantly let be known your biased views. “It’s an agenda that enriches the NRA’s financial backers in the weapons trade, but endangers millions of citizens.” Your insinuation here is that the act of owning a gun is endangering people. Responsable ownership of guns by citizens saves lives everyday. Irresponsable use of guns by law enforcement cost citizens lives. Illegal use of guns by criminals make fodder for you gun controle nuts to use to push your agenda. You mistakenly think that you can misdirect the criminal use of guns to the responsable ownership of guns. Here is an exorcise for you compare how many crimes were committed with gun were committed by the rightful registered owners of those guns and take that number and compare it to the number of negligent discharge of a fire arm in the line of duty by a law enforcement officer that resulted in a fatality. I’m sure you will find that the numbers of responsable gun owners that commit gun violence pales in comparison to LEO’s running around shooting citizens.
Out of the 102,923 killed or injured by guns a year 1.028 were killed or injured by LEOs. Responsible gun owners or not too many people are shot. Bundy was crazy demanding LEO to be disarmed and face a bunch of crazies just waiting for any excuse to murder them.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/sites/default/files/GunDeathandInjuryStatSheet3YearAverageFINAL.pdf
“Responsable ownership of guns by citizens saves lives everyday.” – Please give me an example. How? I know many hunters and owners of guns (both legal and illegal types), and I don’t see them saving lives every day. And don’t you think for a minute, that if it’s mostly criminals with illegal guns we should be giving the LEO’s MORE gun’s and equipment to fight back and do their job of protecting the general public??? Like having cars on the road, as many of them on the road their is going to be an accident somewhere. 30+ years ago my cousin was shot dead by a sheriff’s son, with the fathers backup gun that was in the house. NRA has always yelled about government taking away guns, but you know what, those illegal guns of the couple of owners I know, have had the guns before they were outlawed, and no black suits came to their door and “came for their gun”. Not seen that at all from all the times the NRA has chicken littled the “coming for your guns” rant. I mean those people that ran to Bundy’s side, on camera was stating they were going to shove the women up front to be first killed. Sound’s like sane people to me, especially when holding military weapons that the NRA keeps saying people need to be able to get and use, just because it’s a gun. Well, I want a Sherman tank in my yard to defend my family, but I can not because it is illegal… where is the NRA on my right to defend my family??? Tank is nothing but a big gun. Bottom line – it is the government wanting to take away guns from someone, the NRA should be yelling about this, but they are not. So that just proves even more that the NRA is nothing but a gun lobby group for the manufactures, not for the citizen’s right. Just like the “national database” they stated the government was going to create on that bill that was going through after the last major school shooting. Even though the bill stated it could and would not do that. But did you know the NRA already has one of anyone who is registered, bought, or any record of gun type activity.
These people are taking self-parody waaaaaay beyond the boundaries.
As it typical Mark, you focus on the guns and not what it could represent. Wouldn’t it be wonderful to have all the power returned to the people and the government actually be at the mercy of we, the people – not a bad thing I would think, but we already know your view about our place and why we should want it that way.
As usual you only focus on what you feel is the problem and not what IS gthe problem.
First of all, the hypocrisy from NRA. No word on the disarmament of officials? Why? What happened to gun rights for all as per their version of the 2nd?
Secondly, pointed ignorance of the fact that your “government being at the mercy of we the people” scenario was played out by the Bundy incident and in fact emphasized in the article above. Armed civilian militia are your idea of “power to the people against the government”?
What happened to the ACTUAL power to the people concept of DEMOCRACY in terms of votes at the ballot box?
Seriously, you right wing nuts have gone as low as to support vigilante violence and insurrection in your ever-persistent quest against an administration you hate.
@grindel1
“Responsable (sic) ownership of guns by citizens”
Responsible firearm ownership should carry a particular burden of obligation:
Gun owners should be required to carry a federally mandated, state issued firearms license (just like a drivers license) that involves the completion of a safety training course and demonstrated proficiency with whatever firearms they own. (Again, just like the DMV.) Firearm liability insurance should be required by law for every owner of every firearm (just like auto insurance) and if you can’t afford or don’t qualify for insurance, then you can’t own guns. In any state with a stand-your-ground law, additional firearm self-defense insurance should also be required. All licensed gun owners should be required to register themselves as well as every firearm in their possession (along with proof of insurance) with a federal database that is accessible to state and local law enforcement.
Convicted felons, those convicted of gun-related misdemeanors, those under a domestic violence restraining order, or those deemed mentally unstable by the courts should not be eligible for a firearms license. Most importantly, state and local law enforcement should institute comprehensive firearm confiscation and enforcement programs that actually purge this country of all non-registered or otherwise illegal guns. Getting caught with an illegal gun should be a big deal, and carry severe penalties. Everything else is meaningless without punitive, incentivized enforcement. All costs associated with the above policies should be funded through fines, penalties, and additional excise taxes imposed on the sale of all firearms and ammunition. (Yet again, just like parking tickets, DUI fines, and gas taxes.) Keep in mind, none of this should be construed as an infringement of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. I don’t have a problem with people owning guns. I just don’t think it’s too much to ask that they jump through the same hoops required to legally drive a car.