Diligence Required (Angst Need not Apply)
By Gerard Valentino
There is a great deal of angst in the pro-gun movement over the impending ascendancy of anti-gun politicians to the presidency. All three current presidential contenders have serious black marks on their gun resume.
Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have long-standing ties to the anti-gun movement and want to reinstate the expired ban on semi-automatic rifles. Clinton has often listed her husband’s 1994 assault weapons ban as one of “their” greatest legacies. McCain has for years crusaded to close the mythical gun show loophole and has tried unsuccessfully to ban gun shows completely.
Anti-gun organizations like the Brady gang are quick to point out that the stained pedigree of the three presidential contenders is proof the anti-gun movement is about to rise again. But as usual, the anti-gun con-men are misreading the tea leaves.
Although pro-gun advocates must always remain vigilant in the fight to protect our rights, we are in a presidential election where the gun issue is an afterthought – and that is a good thing. It’s good because it proves that even longtime anti-gun politicians like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama know their views are a one-way ticket to becoming the next Al Gore.
In 2000, Gore famously lost his home state of Tennessee, and the presidency, over his anti-gun views and that defeat taught gun-grabbing politicians that if they run on gun control, they will lose over it. This isn’t a call to let our guard down, however, in fact the lack of discussion over the gun issue is a reason to be even more dedicated.
As the political world found out with the 1994 Republican revolution, which was largely a foregone conclusion after the passage of the Clinton assault weapons ban, and the 2004 presidential pro-gun theatrics perpetrated by John Kerry, the gun issue now plays a huge roll in the electoral process. That is true even when it goes largely unmentioned like in the current presidential election.
Only Bill Clinton was able to weather the storm while in office. But he never went back to the anti-gun well after the 1994 elections.
The lack of discussion over the gun issue has a lot of pro-gun advocates wondering if Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are using the Trojan horse method of campaigning. Basically, the theory goes, once in office they will jump out from their hiding place and try to confiscate our guns.
Nobody can be sure that won’t happen. But, even if it does, that isn’t a bad thing since it will show gun owners who their true enemies are. It will also motivate voters who weren’t paying attention that the fight to keep our rights is always alive. Hopefully, provoking them to vote gun rights in the future and forcing them to realize freedom takes never ending vigilance.
There is some risk in the gun issue being driven off the front page since the anti-gun schemers can perpetrate their fraud in the absence of proper scrutiny. It also gives them the ability to claim that since politicians who have traditionally been anti-gun are winning higher office it shows the American people are accepting of more gun-control.
Once any mention of gun control exposes the anti-gun schemers true goal, they are invariably slapped into place as the purveyors of bad statistics, emotion based politics and proponents of a discredited belief system.
We are seeing the after-effects of repeated defeats at the ballot box in this election as two noted anti-gunners, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, are vying for the Democratic nomination but say little to nothing about banning guns. Even after the tragedy at Northern Illinois University neither pushed the gun issue onto the front burner and instead sent out a few meaningless press releases.
The rash of rampage shootings since the massacre at Virginia Tech showed that the Democrats don’t have the stomach to fight the gun control battle after being horrible burned by it in the past. Noted economist and author John Lott Jr.’s earth shattering book, More Guns, Less Crime seems more prophetic as American are realizing that rampage killings can only succeed when law-abiding citizens are disarmed.
Don’t be confused or complacent. There can little doubt that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and others of their ilk will never give up their absurd anti-gun ways. Even through their connection to the anti-gun movement has proven to be more about attaining power than a belief that it will lead to a safer America. If it was truly about safety they would run with it as central to their platform.
So, they both either truly don’t believe that gun control is a viable public safety platform or put the value of furthering their own interests over those of average Americans. Either way, they are exposed for being frauds, which eventually happens to most of the anti-gun schemers.
Some are exposed by their choice to throw gun control under the bus to win the presidency or others are exposed when we find out they want to take our guns and have concealed carry license (or an armed body guard) of their own.
In either case they are hypocrites and worthy of our scorn.
Gerard Valentino is the Buckeye Firearms Association Central Ohio Chair, writes for the ValentinoChronicle.com and teaches the Ohio Concealed Carry class through Center Mass LTD.