17 Oct 12
During last eveningâs televised Presidential Debate, to my astonishment, Second Amendment issues actually saw the light of day, albeit for only a brief moment!
A woman, part of a biased, liberal audience and obvious gun-hater, asked BHO about reinstating the 1994 WJC-era âassault-weapons ban,â which mercifully expired in 2004. As a Liberal, she was apparently unhappy that BHOâs first term saw some token anti-gun rhetoric, but no actual anti-gun legislation at the Federal level.
Both candidates, particularly WMR, were obviously fearful of this issue and did their best to get off the subject as quickly as possible, talking about family, education, and a host of other issues, but almost nothing about new, Federal gun legislation.
BHO, like all Democrats, started with â… and I support the Second Amendment, but…â He finally choked out that he favored a reinstatement of the 1994 assault-weapons ban, but sheepishly mumbled it, almost incoherently, as he looked at his shoes, and then got off the subject immediately!
WMR started his response by mumbling that he didnât see a need for additional Federal gun legislation, and then immediately dropped the subject and started talking about the discredited âFast and Furiousâ operation.
The conspicuously biased, gun-hating âModeratorâ tried, in-vain as it turns out, to get him back on the actual question asked, but then BHO chimed-in, pointing-out, correctly, that, when he was governor of MA, WMR actually signed a state-level âassault-weaponâ ban. WMR did not dispute it, but went on to explain the legislation in question was the product of his effort to bring pro-gun and anti-gun factions together. I donât recall any pro-gun group supporting the final product!
The term âassault-weaponâ was not defined, and indeed has never been, despite the best efforts of liberal politicians and BATFE combined! Just as soon as they talk about banning Kalashnikovs, they invariably start talking about âassault-pistolsâ and âassault-shotguns,â and it becomes painfully obvious that all firearms, with the possible exception of flint-locks, are lumped, automaton-like, into the slippery category of âassault-weaponâ and are then promptly slated for banning. Weâve see it all before, many times, and there is no reason to believe the next round of proposed federal legislation will be any less draconian.
âAssault-weapon,â like âmillionaires-and-billionairesâ and âshovel-ready,â is just another ill-defined, over-exploited, meaningless political buzz-term, used exclusively to inspire hollow emotion, never logical thinking!
Bottom line is both candidates clumsily, fearfully dodged this issue. Apparently, it will never be discussed directly and honestly in an open forum.
That Americans are currently in no mood for additional restrictions on their gun-rights is not in dispute. But, groups of leftists still look for requiem anti-gun rhetoric from the mouths of those running for public office under the Democrat banner, so BHO obviously thinks he is obligated to at least throw them a bone.
Conversely, WMR avoids the issue like the plague!
In reading current DNC and RNC Party Platforms, for what little theyâre worth, those of us on the pro-freedom side have little choice but to support Republican candidates, including WMR.
A candid and authentic discussion of Second Amendment issues ever seeing the light of day is probably more than we can hope for!
/John
