Evolution Of A Lie: “We’re not talking about taking guns away from people”

A Short Reference List Of Leftists Calling For Gun Confiscation [or any synonym thereof.]
Updated to Oct 2017

Advertisements

Mass murder shootings have become all too common these days due in no small part to the destruction of society’s moral underpinnings by the nation’s Left through the vestiges of cultural Marxism. They also revel in using such tragedies to advance their cause of depriving the people of their common sense civil right of armed self defense. Consequently, the minute one occurs the clarion call for even more people control will ascend from their ranks.

The past few years have seen their propaganda evolve and change, and this will be an examination of this evolution as well as a short reference list that puts the lie to their oft repeated talking point that no one is talking about taking guns away from people.

In the past, the gun grabbers rarely brought up Confiscationthe ‘C’ word. Back then, that was just for certain types of weapons with a divide and conquer strategy. At the time, the propaganda was epitomised by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif with this from a “60 minutes” interview on CBS: “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them — Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in — I would have done it.”
Never mind that the term “Assault Weapon” has no set definition and could be applied to any type of object usable as a weapon to assault someone.

Even as recently as 2011 it was a case of where the nation’s Left was trying to implement gun control “but under the radar”

The contradictory line has always been as Nancy Pelosi said recently: “We’re not talking about taking guns away from people”. They have to maintain this fiction because confiscation requires the precursor steps of ‘Intergalactic Background Checks’ and registration. The people wouldn’t accede to these measures if they knew it meant their property was to be stolen from them. This is why the gun grabbers have solemnly promised that ‘Intergalactic Background Checks’ won’t lead to registration. And why gun grabbers solemnly promise that registration wouldn’t lead to Confiscation, or the other form when they are made an offer they couldn’t refuse in the form of a mandatory gun “Buy Back”. So, the gun grabbers had to maintain the lie that the ultimate objective of their endeavour wasn’t their ultimate objective.

But times have changed and these days the gun grabbers strive to maintain the fiction that they aren’t talking about confiscation while they talk about confiscation. This will be a guide to their calls for the repeal of the 2nd amendment, confiscation, banning of guns or whatever phrases they have chosen to employ. There really shouldn’t be any sort of list given the line “We’re not talking about taking guns away from people”. But since the nation’s Left will often lie out of both sides of their mouth, it will be an abbreviated enumeration of most of the recent occasions when they expressed a desire for “taking guns away from people”.

As mentioned previously, Leftists had confined their gun confiscation dreams certain kinds of weaponry. For example, In March 2012 there was one author “themoderateman” on the site ‘The Daily Kos’, Who out of the sheer generosity of his heart was willing to mete out the people’s common sense civil rights, letting them keep certain guns… but taking everything else:Yes conservatives, we want to take away your guns…
Such magnanimous generosity over our fundamental human rights did not last for long, however, soon after came the re-election of Barack Obama and the horrific mass murder at Sandy Hook in December 2012 and the floodgates opened up. The nation’s Left saw that time as an historic opportunity to be honest about what they truly wanted. Keyword searches before the Fall of 2012 of such terms as ‘Confiscation’ ,‘Gun ban’, ‘Repeal the 2nd amendment’ yielded few results. December 2012 saw an emboldened Left dropping the mask and expanding reach of their confiscation desires to semi-automatic firearms – and that would essentially be most firearms.

Governor . Andrew M. Cuomo (D – New York) inaugurated the proceedings with the words “Confiscation could be an option.”

That turning point in gun grabber history had them calling for confiscation whenever possible and they have never looked back. The same keyword searches will yield a deluge of results, this will just be a short compilation of those results.
[Note: Due to the sheer number of references, this will be an abbreviated list confined to just the links and short descriptions in some cases from the main players in the gun grabber realm]

December 2012
House Dem: ‘Turn in your guns’
The Daily Kos: How to Ban Guns: A step by step, long term process

Curiously enough, all this talk of gun confiscation didn’t ameliorate the people’s fears of gun confiscation and they rose in opposition to the practice, joined the NRA,GOA and local civil rights organizations, bought more guns and stocked up on ammunition. As is usually the case, the fervor died down until the next ‘serious crisis’ took place and the demands for Confiscation began once again. This has been repeated every time with the demands becoming more and more numerous:

May 2014
LA Times: Opinion You say gun control doesn’t work? Fine. Let’s ban guns altogether.

June 2014
Barack Obama: “A couple of decades ago, Australia had a mass shooting similar to Columbine or Newtown. And Australia just said, well, that’s it — we’re not seeing that again. And basically imposed very severe, tough gun laws.”

December 2014
Wisconsin gazette: Time is overdue to repeal the Second Amendment

January 7, 2015
Tallahassee Democrat: Stop the insanity: Ban guns

June 2015
Sun-Sentinel: Don’t just get rid of flag, get rid of the gun, too

Please note that this was a transitional time period for the nation’s Left they had gone from just wanting to ban the undefined construct “Assault Weapon” to some wanting to ban semi-auto firearms, while others wanted to confiscate everything. Over time this would evolve to most leftists wanting a complete ban on guns in various forms.

October 2015
Baltimore Sun: Repeal the Second Amendment
The Daily Kos: Effective Gun Control – A National Semi-Auto Ban

Hillary Clinton: “In the Australian example, as I recall, that was a buyback program.”…..“I think it would be worth considering doing it on the national level”

Barack Obama: “We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours — Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it.”
The Washington Post: A gun-free society

U.S. News & World Report: It’s True, Democrats Want to Take Your Guns

November 2015
The Daily Beast: Yes, They Want to Take Your Guns Away

December 2015
The New York Times: End the Gun Epidemic in America [First Front Page Editorial In 95 Years]
Huffington Post: We don’t need gun control. We need domestic disarmament
New Republic: It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them.
Salon: The Second Amendment must go: We ban lawn darts. It’s time to ban guns

June 2016
Rolling Stone: Why It’s Time to Repeal the Second Amendment

July 2016

Clinton Delegate Explains How Democrats Will Ban All Guns

October 2017
(CNN)Sachs: Ban semiautomatic assault weapons and save lives

Rawstory: So few Americans understand what the Second Amendment is really about — or its dark history [repeal the Second Amendment.]
New York Times: The Cancer in the Constitution [2nd amendment]
Prospect magazine: Dear America: it’s time to grow up and ban guns

Plan A Magazine: Ban Guns. Amend the Constitution.
The New York Times: Repeal the Second Amendment
The Week: Ban guns
Eugene Robinson: Gun control should include buyback program like Australia’s

Dan Pfeiffer: What to Bring to the Gun Fight [national gun registry, Tracking and limiting purchases of ammunition and a national gun buyback program]
Washington Post Editorial Board : “President Trump, end this ‘American carnage.'”[Australian-Style Gun Ban]

At this point in time the question has to be asked: Who HASN’T talked about taking guns away from people?

Originally Posted on the NOQ Report

Remember these numbers: 120 Million Gun Owners and 600 Million guns.

One of the perennial tropes of the gun grabbers of the national Socialist left is that gun ownership is declining and seemingly after years and years of record gun sales the number of guns remains at 300 Million. Basic scientific logic tells us that positive flow into a control space will result in an accumulation, and yet we’re supposed to believe this isn’t the case. Recent analysis and polling has dispensed with these mythical notions.

120 Million Gun Owners

A recent poll by Wall Street Journal has only confirmed what we’ve known all along, that gun ownership is expanding at an incredible rate. While the folks who avail themselves armed protection have tried to disdain this for the ‘commoners’, the people have instead stocked up on firearms, ammunition and other supplies. Anyone who has compared the crowds at gun shows at present with only a few months ago can attest to this phenomena.

QF10 Do you, or does anyone in your household, own a gun of any kind?

                                             9/17 6/16+ 10/15 2/13
Yes, gun in household      48     45        41     42
No, no gun in household 50      50       54     54

The question was one of the last in the survey and asked ‘for statistical purposes only’, but it puts the lie to the gun grabber narrative of declining gun ownership. This falsehood made no sense given recent events and trends. People generally want to be able to protect themselves from Islamic Terrorism, and don’t trust the gun grabbers with their next incremental abrogation of everyone’s common sense civil rights. The people know that as is typical of the national Socialist Left, they are never honest about their true intentions and their ultimate goals. The gun grabbers will never openly admit that the obvious end game to their incessant attacks against the people’s common sense civil rights is to extinguish them in their entirety. Thus more and more people are following the advice of ‘getting your guns while you still can’. As well as having a few ‘extra’ for emergencies.
Keep in mind that many people won’t actually divulge their gun ownership to some random person chatting them up on the phone, so it’s most likely that that number is a bit low.

The Washington Free Beacon  ran the numbers from the United States Census Bureau and determined that there are (at least) 120 Million Gun Owners:

The United States Census Bureau estimates there are 249,454,440 adults currently living in America. If the Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey is accurate, that equates to 119,738,131 Americans with a gun in their home.

The odds are that those numbers are a bit low given the reticence of people to divulge this information, but it’s a good starting point.

600 Million guns

The gun grabbers also like to play the game of disinformation with regard to the number of firearms in circulation. The number commonly bandied about is 300 Million or expressed in terms of one gun for every man, woman and child in the nation or some variation thereof. The problem is that this factoid has remained unchanged through many years of tribulation. Recently the weaponsman took a hard look at the issue and ran the numbers:

We believe that the correct number is much higher — somewhere between 412 and 660 million. You may wonder how we came to that number, so buckle up (and cringe, if you’re a math-phobe, although it never gets too theoretical): unlike most of the academics and reporters we linked above, we’re going to use publicly available data, and show our work.

What if we told you that one ATF computer system logged, by serial number, 252,000,000 unique firearms, and represented only those firearms manufactured, imported or sold by a relatively small number of the nation’s tens of thousands of Federal Firearms Licensees?

One other way of looking at this would be to compare this to the recent polling data. If 48% or 120 Million people now have a gun in the house, how can it be that the 300 Million factoid remains the same?

As in every other endeavour, the national Socialist Left has to lie about their agenda and intentions. Their attempts at reaching their ultimate goal of confiscation are not different. They want people to believe that people are agreeing with them on the issue of ‘gun safety’. That one’s best means of protection is one not having a means of protection. That the buying back of something they never owned is somehow decreasing the number of guns and gun owners.

These are clearly lies of the part of the national Socialist Left, but that has never stopped them before.

So whenever the subject guns crops up, keep these facts in mind.

In Congress, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. — The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our People, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from Punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free system of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislature, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions we have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

[Our Emphasis]

How can there be record gun sales without a change in the ‘300 Million guns’ factoid?

The past few years have seen the pithy little factoid ‘300 Million guns’ being bandied about with little regard to its accuracy. One cannot have a record number of anything flowing into the marketplace without a change in it’s quantity. This would be akin to a dozens fire hoses filling up a swimming pool without a change in the water level. The weaponsman ran the numbers and came up with better estimate of 412-660 Million.

There are certain factoids that tend to be tossed out without any thought to their logic or accuracy. When it comes to certain subject matter, many journalists would rather parrot these ‘facts’ instead of taking the time to research their source or even their accuracy. The ‘300 Million guns’ is one such factoid, but then again the gun grabbers have never been sticklers for accuracy, what with Terry McAuliffe (D.) making the claim that that the United States loses “93 million Americans a day to gun violence.”

The weaponsman took a hard look at the issue and ran the numbers:

We believe that the correct number is much higher — somewhere between 412 and 660 million. You may wonder how we came to that number, so buckle up (and cringe, if you’re a math-phobe, although it never gets too theoretical): unlike most of the academics and reporters we linked above, we’re going to use publicly available data, and show our work.

What if we told you that one ATF computer system logged, by serial number, 252,000,000 unique firearms, and represented only those firearms manufactured, imported or sold by a relatively small number of the nation’s tens of thousands of Federal Firearms Licensees?

Bearing arms looked this issue as well and has the best internet meme on the subject:

#Additional Questions Leftists Cannot Answer

Was the ‘Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik’ Socialist?

Was the ‘Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiter-Partei’ Socialist?

Is the ‘Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela’ Socialist?

Is the ‘Partido Comunista de Cuba’ Communist?

 
Why do most shootings take place in “Gun Free” Zones?

Do you have the Commonsense Civil Right of Armed Self Defense?

If Socialism is so wonderful, why does it have to be imposed at the point of a Gun?

Where does the Government obtain the authority to control your property with Intergalactic Background Checks?

How are new laws supposed to control people who by definition do not obey the law in the first place?

Should the Government have control over it’s own constraints?

Who actually denies the existence of Climate?

Do you have a ‘right’ to healthcare?

Debunking the myth that the national socialist left actually cares about people.

“Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it.” Milton Friedman

Recently the chairman of the DNC belched forth a profanity laced tirade that the Republicans “don’t give a s**t about people”:

This does engender the question with regard to the Left’s underlying motivations. Why is it always assumed that national socialist left really cares about people? A close examination of the results of their agenda in a few examples from recent history will prove it is they who are uncaring.

First of all, we will dispense with the socialist-left’s perennial excuse of having Good intentions for the repeated and abject failure of their agenda. At some point, one has to look at the cold hard reality of results instead of mere intent. Time and time again it can be shown that the Left’s socialist national agenda did nothing to help people, despite their repeated exhortations to the contrary. The fact that they have not changed to that which actually works shows that they are truly uncaring about the plight of the people under their rule.

Let us take a look at the results of the Left’s socialist national agenda this is ostensibly meant to help people and see if the truth of the situation bears this out.

Did LBJ’s ‘Great Society’ function as advertised?

Let’s look at the analysis from the Heritage Foundation: The War on Poverty After 50 Years

In his January 1964 State of the Union address, President Lyndon Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.” In the 50 years since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs. Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all U.S. military wars since the American Revolution. Yet progress against poverty, as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau, has been minimal, and in terms of President Johnson’s main goal of reducing the “causes” rather than the mere “consequences” of poverty, the War on Poverty has failed completely. In fact, a significant portion of the population is now less capable of self-sufficiency than it was when the War on Poverty began.

[Our emphasis]

The lens of history informs us this is not the case, despite the myriad promises put forth in the sale of the ‘War on Poverty’. Despite $22 trillion in wealth redistribution there hasn’t been any change for the nation’s poverty stricken.

Instead of actually caring and helping people, this ‘wealth transfer’ took opportunities for economic growth away that would have actually lifted the people out of poverty. But then again, had the people done this on their own they would no longer have any need for the nation’s socialist left.

More recently, how well did the people fair under Obamacare?

Again from the Heritage Foundation and the Daily signal:The Daily Signal Documents the Real-Life Consequences of Obamacare

Americans are struggling due to the failing health care law, and The Daily Signal’s stories are making their way into the national debate, in some cases because they have gone unreported or outright ignored by other media outlet.

Here is a sample of The Daily Signal’s unique and original reporting on the issue.

Meet 2 Hurting Americans Who Are Ready for Congress to Repeal Obamacare

In 6 Charts, the Rising Costs of Obamacare Rates

In 3 Years, His Insurance Premiums Double as Options Decline Under Obamacare

The 16th Obamacare Co-Op Has Collapsed. Here’s How Much Each Failed Co-Op Got in Taxpayer-Funded Loans.

Does that sampling even sound close to the national socialist left helping people with their much vaunted Obamacare?

Finally, there is the issue of Democratically run cities and People control.

Can anyone seriously argue that people have been helped in cities under decades of leftist rule? Can anyone make the case that depriving people of their civil right of self-defense has kept them safe? The nation’s socialist left can only offer an unending string of excuses for the abject failure of their policies in cities such as Detroit and Chicago.

From the Cato Institute on the causes of the destruction of Detroit: Government, Not Globalization, Destroyed Detroit

Former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm blames “free trade” for the decline of Detroit’s auto industry and thus the city itself.

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman suggests that “for the most part the city was just an innocent victim of market forces.”

Another MSNBC contributor, Michael Eric Dyson, suggests that “racial animus” was the real culprit.

Then there is the issue that should more aptly labelled people control. It’s always one of those amusing exercises to ask one of our esteemed members of the nation’s socialist left where their ideas of people control have actually worked. Most often the response will either be statistical lies or excuses for it’s failure in cities such as Chicago.

The fact is the Left’s theories on how the world should work redound badly on the lowest rung of the economic strata. It is the poor and downtrodden of the inner cities with strict gun control that bear the brunt of the magical thinking of the national socialist left with regard to one’s right of self defense. And once again we can see that if they really cared about those people, they would reverse their disastrous policies. But they refuse to do so even with the evidence staring them in the face.

Again from the Cato Institute: The Costs and Consequences of Gun Control

At some point down through the decades, it should have occurred to the leftists that their socialist national agenda does not work. The evidence has been in front of everyone for years, and yet the left ignores or even denies it’s existence at times. Therefore, one can only draw the inescapable conclusion that they are unconcerned about the horrific results of their agenda on the people they profess to care about.

Conversely, if they really were concerned about people they would take responsibility for the effects of what they have done in the past and make changes to avoid these results in the future. Thus far they have not admitted to the culpability of their actions of the past, nor have they taken any steps to alter their socialist national agenda into something that actually works.

Good intentions mean nothing in the face of misery brought on by those who purport to care about people. The facts are clear, the socialist national agenda of the left hurts the people they supposedly want to help. If they truly cared they would change their ideology, the fact that they do not is prime fascia evidence that they.. in the words of Tom Perez: “don’t give a s***t about people”