American Rifleman - August 2017 - 19
By Chris W. Cox
The NRA's Legislative
Agenda Looks to a
Freer, Safer America
Photos by NRA Staff
t's an encouraging sign of progress that
when it comes to the issue of firearms
in America, the pro-freedom viewpoint
establishes the terms of the debate.
You'd be hard-pressed these days to find
a gun control advocate who would admit to
wanting to repeal the Second Amendment
and ban private gun ownership. Yet gun
control proponents have the same goals as
they always have.
At best, they look to Australia and
Europe as their guide. Gun ownership might
still be possible for a dedicated or privileged
few, but only at the discretion of a designated official-and even then subject to
such intrusive, expensive and burdensome
bureaucracy so as to scare off all but the
most dogged or well-heeled.
At worst, they embody the Hillary Clinton
view that the Supreme Court was "wrong" on
the Second Amendment's individual right and
that taxpayer-financed surrender programs
should be undertaken at the national level.
Too many Americans already live under
some version of the first scenario. Lawfully
owing a gun in Boston, Los Angeles,
Newark, New York City, San Francisco or
Washington, D.C., is not much easier than
in the European capitals that are the subject
of hero-worship among these cities' ruling
classes. Lawfully carrying a gun for selfdefense is wholly out of reach for the common man or woman.
But the modern gun control movement insists that it "supports" the Second
Amendment and merely wants "reasonable
regulation" aimed at reducing "gun violence."
Again and again, they speak of wanting a "conversation" and finding "middle
ground." But the only thing they want to talk
about is where to start with further restrictions on the Second Amendment-protected
rights of law-abiding Americans. And their
idea of "middle ground" is phasing in their
gun control schemes by increments.