If gun owners are going to preserve their right keep and bear arms, they're going to do more than just complain about the progressive agenda to confiscate all firearms. So said Second Amendment Attorney Jim Ostrowski at a grassroots meeting of gun rights advocates at the Days Inn in Batavia today.
They're going to need to find allies.
Potential allies include those, he said, who think recreational drug possession should be legal.
"Guns are drugs are the same issue, if you think about it," said Ostrowski, a resident and political activist in Buffalo. "They're both private property."
He said there was a time in this country when there was no thought of restricting either guns or drugs but progressives wanted the power to control other people's lives.
Another potential ally, the #metoo movement. Women should naturally want the right to the self-protection a gun provides, he said.
"What does the government monopoly want a woman do when assaulted?" he said. "Call 9-1-1 where a criminal historian can record the assault."
Native Americans, given the history of government atrocities against them, should also be natural allies of gun rights advocates, he said.
Those whose ancestors were slaves, he said, should also be natural allies of gun rights advocates. He noted that recently progressive historical revisionists have said the only reason early America had militias was to guard against potential slave revolts. He said those who spread that as historical fact ignore the fact that militias existed where there wasn't slavery and that one reason slavery could even survive was that slaves were prohibited from owning firearms. The ancestors of slaves should be among the strongest allies for gun rights advocates, he said.
Among the chief reason to preserve the Second Amendment, Ostrowski said, is because progressives want to take guns away from citizens, which would make it easier for tyranny to take hold in this country.
While the left wants to disarm citizens, they love a government with guns, he said.
"They love guns so much, they want to be the only one with guns," Ostrowski said.
Among his recommendations for activists is convince schools to start teaching students once again about the Second Amendment, its history and its meaning.
"They don't teach the Second Amendment in school," Ostrowski said. "That's crazy. That's why students are out protesting."
People shouldn't think, he said, the United States is necessarily immune from the potential of tyranny.
"Every race we know about has committed mass atrocities," Ostrowski said. "The whole of history is filled with examples of mass murder by the state. The Framers were well aware of this history, that only armed citizens can protect against tyranny. The Second Amendment works against tyranny. That's why the left so desperately wants the entire civilian population disarmed."
So, I couldn't say anything
So, I couldn't say anything today, but the whole time I was taking notes I was thinking: tyrannies don't just start with progressives or leftists. The 20th Century provides plenty of examples of right-wing dictatorships.
The Roman Republic fell after Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon not to instill a communist utopia but to preserve his own power and protect the elite ruling class from plebeian reforms.
Tyranny comes in all shapes and forms and knows no ideology.
When dictators rise, it isn't the guns they come for first. They first come after the free press and start locking up and killing journalists. Look at what Erdoğan is doing in Turkey.
I fear rightist populists as much as I fear leftist socialists.
So my question for those on the right, if a rightest leader declares himself "president for life" and starts coming after a free press, are you going to use your guns to protect my First Amendment right to publish what I want?
If you want to talk about natural allies, a natural ally for advocates for the Second Amendment are advocates of the First Amendment, because as sure as fire is hot, there will be no Second Amendment without the First.
What.The.Heck?!? Drugs are
What.The.Heck?!? Drugs are the same as firearms? Man - the drugs this guy is on must be very, very impressive ones....
IF I take drugs, barring my getting behind the wheel of a car or grabbing a weapon, I affect myself, and only myself. This is true whether I use those drugs in a responsible manner, or an irresponsible manner.
If I grab a firearm, I have the capability of affecting not only myself, but EVERY SINGLE PERSON WITHIN THE FIRING RANGE OF THAT WEAPON.
Sorry, guy, but drugs are not the same as firearms. If he cannot grasp that simple concept, I have to question his other statements.
If I
I certainly would. Scoundrels
I certainly would. Scoundrels come in all shapes and sizes. See George w Bush, barrack Obama, both war criminals. Also see Fox news and CNN. Both supporters of war criminals. How so? Neither made even cursory attempts at investigating or pushing for investigations of either war criminal.
Just like any other right guaranteedby the constitution, it's worth fighting for. All battles aren't fought with violence. Violence is the resort of a lack of reason. Guns are a great last resort against the unreasonable who threaten our safety or our freedoms.
The people need to stay acutely informed and use their reasoning acumen to stay truly free and truly safe. Especially when those in super power positions are sorely lacking in their inherent duties.
Tim Miller, you missed his
Tim Miller, you missed his point. He didn't say guns and drugs were the same.
True, Howard, plenty of
True, Howard, plenty of Republicans voted for the unSAFE act. Proof that threats come from all sides.
I don't think China and the
I don't think China and the old USSR were considered "Right Wing" dictatorships.
Who said they were?
Who said they were?
Howard, in your first post,
Howard, in your first post, it seemed you were implying it is right wing dictatorships, but I misread the paragraph.
"Guns are drugs are the same
"Guns are drugs are the same issue, if you think about it," said Ostrowski, a resident and political activist in Buffalo. "They're both private property."
Doug - yeah - he said they are the same... "guns and drugs are the same issue... they're both private property."
He said they were the same in
He said they were the same in that they are both personal property.
The impulse of authoritarians to control what other people do with their personal property is the same. That is the important sameness.
Both drugs and guns have negative externalities but the honest debate is whether those negative externalities in both cases rise to the level of justifying authoritarian impulses.
Oh, the right wants to use
Oh, the right wants to use women and #MeToo to further their gun agenda. Before or after they destroy women’s reproductive rights and criminalize miscarriage.
Where is his proof of “…the progressive agenda to confiscate all firearms.” Only from the right have I ever heard this BS.
Their hypocritical ignorance is breathtaking.
Howard, I agree with what you
Howard, I agree with what you posted about no Second amendment without the First. For some reason the Editors at the Buffalo News have written editorials in support of the banning of certain firearms. Firearms that they claim should be for the military and law enforcement only... When I read this I wondered how they would feel if certain parts of the "First" were amended to say that the press could no longer criticize in any way the office of the president....
I believe the Buffalo News would have a problem with an amended First Amendment but for some reason they don't find any problem amending the Second. very ironic.
David, I think there should
David, I think there should be more dialogue between journalist and gun owners about the Bill of Rights.
Julie, I don't think you can
Julie, I don't think you can have "proof" until after it happens. From prior practices of our government, they have proven, once they take something away they keep taking, it doesn't end.
Julie, all you have to do is
Julie, all you have to do is listen to the left. Even a retired US Supreme Court Judge said the 2nd Amendment should be removed. Limits to rights start small. Then it's always a little bit more of a limit and then just a little bit more.