“Lie about Confiscating Guns.”


Joy Behar’s “recommendation” to gun-grabbing freedom-denying politicians is to lie about their intent to confiscate guns, then just do it once they’re in office.

Well, we’re used to politicians lying to us.  It’s more surprising when they tell the truth.  However even their lies can be informative.  The thing to remember is that a politician has only one raison de etre.  Anything they say, anything they do, has only one purpose:  to win their next election.  There may be occasional exceptions (for instance, a President heading toward a second term being more “flexible” after their last election), but that’s the general rule.  This is especially true when it comes to lies:  they lie because it’s what they need to do to get elected.

Now consider that in the light of Ms. Behar’s recommendation.  Lie about gun confiscation because that’s what you need to do to get elected.  After all, consider how Robert “Beta” O’Roark’s” campaign tanked on his “ban the guns, have mandatory ‘buy backs’, and police going door to door if people don’t comply with the ‘buy back’.” (How can you buy something “back” that you never sold in the first place?)

If you want to be elected, you have to lie about confiscating guns.  At the very least you have to couch it in indirect terms such as “Australian-style gun control” or “UK-style gun control”.  Both of those were widespread confiscations but most people on hearing those terms don’t think of it in those terms.

But here’s the flip side of that.  The same people who are lying about their positions (unless you catch them in unguarded moments), or at the very least are spinning a net of words so you don’t think of it in those terms, are also the ones claiming that there is broad support amounting to a majority of Americans for the “Australian” or “UK” style gun control–for bans and confiscation.

So which is it?  Do you have to lie about banning being the goal to win elections or does banning have the broad support claimed for it?  Because you can’t have both.  If it were really something that a majority of Americans supported, then you would be touting it to the heavens in order to win those votes.

Oh, sure, you point to public polls saying that a majority of Americans support this ban or that ban, “mandatory buy-backs”, and so on and so on. And a correctly designed and implemented poll can give one a good idea of what ideas are popular among the American people.  But not all polls are well designed and well implemented.  Some are designed not so much to measure public opinion but to try to shape it.

And, by your own actions, concealing that you really do want to take their guns in order to win elections, you show that you do not believe those poll results yourself.  Perhaps your internal polls, those aimed to actually measure public opinion rather than attempt to manipulate it, tell a different story than the publicly reported ones?


Then show us you have the courage of your convictions.  Go all-in on gun confiscation, whether called a “buy back” or simply a legal requirement that a person divest themselves of their firearms (with no one else legally able to buy them so the only de fecto legal option is surrender to law enforcement).  Show us that you actually believe those polls.

Or just watch the rest of us as we keep pointing and saying “liar.”


2 thoughts on ““Lie about Confiscating Guns.””

  1. I have a more direct means for these people to prove the courage of their convictions:

    Dismiss your armed guards, move out of your gated communities, sell your armoured limousines, and disarm yourselves FIRST. Live like you expect US to live, lead by example.

    I’m tired of this “Do as I say, not as I do” shit from the other side. I learned a long time ago that leadership as a simple definition – “Follow me.” I led from the front in the military, I lead from the front as a civilian. As a result, I’ve not failed to have people go where I lead them – because I L-E-A-D them there. I always kicked the door in, and was the first one through. The only reason for me to not be doing the job I was telling you to do was because I was doing something harder somewhere else, that I hadn’t taught you how to do yet.

    So, to the “luminaries” of the liberty elimination movement (for that is exactly what it is,) I have this to say; “LEAD us. Do what you’re telling US to do – or why should WE do it if YOU are unwilling to? No more of this ‘different rules’ nonsense, no more ‘do as I say, not as I do.’ You want US to disarm? Fine – YOU disarm first! You think that ‘Gun-Free Zone’ signs are effective protection, then put them up IN YOUR FRONT YARD AFTER YOU HAVE DISARMED, and we’ll see just how much protection they are.

    “Feinstein, Pelosi, et al – dismiss your Secret Service or other protective details, sell off your armoured limousines, dismiss your drivers, fly ‘Coach’ class with the rest of us. Let us bend your ear for a bit, see just what you’re doing to us.

    “I figure it’s a little early to try something I read in a novel somewhere, but I like the idea – it ran that once a year, on a moonless night, the elected leader(s) of a State would wear white, wear hats with lamps on them, and walk about in the darkness. Citizens were permitted to wear what they wished and do as they wished, and there were no repercussions if the leader(s) were found dead in the morning. This kept the leader(s) from doing anything terribly unpopular without some serious justification, which is just as it should be (you want to disarm the people in the face of the threats we face? Come up with something better than ‘It’s for the children!’ – that’s /why/ we’re armed! Something better than ‘They’re scary-looking!’ – good, that’s why we have them, to scare people into /not/ attacking us!

    “I’d just LOVE to hear about Pelosi walking the streets of San Francisco, on a New Moon, with the streetlights out – wearing a white pantsuit, a lamp that’s just enough to let us all know where she is, and /knowing/ that there won’t be any repercussions if she’s found dead in the morning. We’ll find out just how popular her ‘efforts at common-sense firearms legislation’ really are – we on the Right suffer from the handicap of ‘playing nice,’ while the Left suffers from no such compunction.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: