Opinion
-(AmmoLand.com)- Contrary to what many loud voices in the media have been saying, Second Amendment supporters, to a person, are horrified at the events that took place in Buffalo and Laguna Woods over the weekend. Unlike many others, though, we had to deal with the usual lies and the ghoulish exploitation of a horrific act by anti-Second Amendment extremists.
Once again, Second Amendment supporters will need to reject the notion that their opposition to the agenda pushed by anti-Second Amendment extremists over the years makes them culpable in any way, shape, or form for what happened. The moral culpability for these acts is on those who carried them out, and the efforts by anti-Second Amendment extremists to blame us for exercising our First Amendment rights to protect the Second Amendment should be shut down.
This is one of those times where it is not just okay to respond with anger at anti-Second Amendment extremists, it is a tactical and strategic necessity. Not punching back is a form of unilateral disarmament that poses a far greater danger than a few rhetorical broadsides, and the considerations as to how we punch back should also be tactical and strategic.
While it is still early, there are indications that the alleged Buffalo shooter (who doesn’t deserve any notoriety for the despicable actions he supposedly carried out) gave off warning signs, but that no real action was taken to head him off. This will cause a push for more “red flag” laws with plenty of issues vis-à-vis due process.
The fact of the matter is that Second Amendment supporters need to find ways to address these types of incidents and to prevent them. At some point, we can’t just offer thoughts and prayers, we need to offer solutions that don’t threaten the Second Amendment, because failure to do so over the long term will lead to the likes of Bloomberg packing the Supreme Court, at which point, we could lose Heller and McDonald.
In the short to medium term, though, we could also see a very real threat of financial deplatforming, as banks and insurance companies could very well enact a form of social credit that would exclude the firearms industry. Do you really think companies wouldn’t impose such an agenda?
Loyal Ammoland readers, take a good look at the entire “Environmental, Social, and Governance” (ESG) efforts taking place in corporate America, then ask yourself if you really don’t think that an anti-Second Amendment agenda will become a criterion for a company to get a high ESG score.
The legal victories that could be in store for the Second Amendment will be good news. However, at the same time, we need to remember that these legal victories will not be the end all and be all. Our system of government contemplates the repeal of the Second Amendment or packing the Supreme Court.
To prevent those, Second Amendment supporters need to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists via the ballot box at the federal, state, and local levels. But that will take real efforts to come up with Second Amendment compliant solutions to mass shootings.
About Harold Hutchison
Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.
from https://ift.tt/pYzBbRx
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment