WASHINGTON — Wayne LaPierre, the executive director of the National Rifle Association, angrily accused President Obama on Tuesday of demonizing law-abiding gun owners and of wanting to put “every private personal firearms transaction right under the thumb of the federal government.”
In a fiery speech at a hunting conference in Nevada, Mr. LaPierre criticized Mr. Obama’s Inaugural Address on Monday when the president said Americans should not “mistake absolutism for principle.”
That reference, Mr. LaPierre said, was intended as an attack on the N.R.A. and gun owners who believe that the Second Amendment to the Constitution provides an absolute right to bear arms.
What gun nuts won’t tell you is that the Second Amendment is the only one, the only one, that places a condition on a Constitutional right. They’ll ignore the language of the first.
part about a “well-regulated militia” — and if the Founders were alive to address this, I think they’d acknowledge local police forces as constituting said militiae — but woe betide anyone who interprets the rest of the Amendment to read as anything but “all the guns we want, all the time.”
But then La Pierre doubled down on teh stoopit:
“I urge our president to use caution when attacking clearly defined absolutes in favor of his principles,” Mr. LaPierre said. “When absolutes are abandoned for principles, the U.S. Constitution becomes a blank slate for anyone’s graffiti.”
In effect, La Pierre is demanding absolutism on his relative terms. For instance, the gun that Founders referred to is a muzzle loader, a musket. At best, you might have a flintlock pistol. Why doesn’t he mention that in his “principle”? After all, colonists had to defend their farms against varmints both human and animal, and they seemed to do a pretty good job of surviving. If the purpose of owning a gun is to defend yourself and your family, then it seems to me that mission accomplished there.
Having seen the failure of his “only a good guy with a gun can protect us from a bad guy with a gun” meme, La Pierre has quickly branched out into terrorism. Not that he was above terrorism before this, but it seems pretty clear that he’s trying to broaden the scope of his argument past the Second Amendment advocacy of the NRA to include Teabaggers and other “l”ibertarians by scaring them about free speech, or freedom of religion, for example.
This post was read 60 times.