Dems Hope to Use Trayvon Martin's Death For Federal Ban On Concealed Carry Permits

Dems Hope to Use Trayvon Martin's Death For Federal Ban On Concealed Carry Permits

As the flames of discontent surrounding the shooting death of Trayvon Martin continue to be fanned by left wing ideologues and shakedown artists like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, there is a serious push afoot to  use whatever momentum they garner to push a federal ban on concealed carry weapons permits for handguns.

In other words, anti-gun politicians unabashedly hope to magnify the events around Martin’s death–events which a grand jury has yet to even consider–and cause so much backlash that the people can be banned from carrying handguns for personal protection ever again.

To put it as one time Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel did: “You never want a serious crisis go to waste.”

Bill Clinton is on board for the ban, and is doing his part to justify it by using a bait and switch tactic on the American people. He did this recently during an interview with ABC’s Jack Tapper when he admitted “people have always had a right to have a handgun in their home to protect their homes,” but then quickly turned the conversation to say that carrying a gun outside the home is a completely different situation: a situation where “anyone who doesn’t have a criminal background, anyone not prohibited by the Brady Bill and caught by the checks, can basically be a part of a neighborhood watch where they have a concealed weapon whether they had proper law enforcement training or not.”

It’s important to note that Clinton misspoke here, in that he suggests the principle reason for gun ownership is the protection of property (of our “homes”). But protection of property is only a proximate reason for gun ownership. The ultimate reason we have guns is to protect ourselves. Understanding this one point justifies the existence of concealed carry laws, for we have to have guns with us in order to protect ourselves.

Of course it goes without saying that President Obama is on board for the ban as well. As a state senator in Illinois he opposed concealed laws for that state and supported laws making it illegal to use a gun for self defense. And in 2004, when he was running for the office of U.S. Senate, he gave an interview to NPR in which he clearly stated his support for a federal ban on concealed carry laws.

And even before the death of Trayvon Martin provided Democrats with the crisis they needed to push for a ban on concealed carry permits, one of Obama’s judicial appointees was already laying the groundwork for such an endeavor. In response to a lawsuit filed by residents of Illinois–the only state that still refuses to pass some kind of concealed carry law for its residents–U.S. Judge Susan Myerscough ruled: “[Although the] plaintiffs argue that the Second Amendment protects a general right to carry guns that include a right to carry operable guns in public … [the] Supreme Court has not recognized a right to bear firearms outside the home.”

Looks like Clinton, Obama, and Myerscough are all speaking from the same talking points. And while those talking points do include the admission that we have a right to keep a gun in our homes, they say nothing about a right to use those guns for defense of self, much less to bear those guns on our persons when we go out in public.

In related news, a 50 year old Florida man was pulled from his car by two youths over the weekend and beat senseless with a hammer. It is uncertain whether he will live or not. Are we supposed to tell his family that he could have defended himself had he been in his home instead of his car?