Media Matters and others continue their anti-gun, anti-rights bias
ICYMI . . .
Gun Rights Policy Conference
By Alan Korwin
The lamestream media told you . . .
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that . . .
Nothing shows the blatant prejudice of the dominant media more than the coverage it gave to one of the most significant firearms events of the year, the Gun Rights Policy Conference in Houston — which is basically — none. The American public essentially doesn’t even know it was held, let alone know anything about what went on there. Dozens of scholars and leaders of the firearms-rights movement attended.
When compared with the saturation coverage even minor poorly attended amateurishly staged insignificant protests in backwater hovels receive, the bias of so-called reporters and their outlets is plainly evident. I plan to do a report on the conference — I took copious notes — but hey, I’m busy, and if it was important, it would have made the news, right?
Media Matters did a lengthy report, with a tone sometimes approximating the end of the world, and introducing a new word to watch. Apparently the anti-rights left will be dropping the phrase “gun control,” now recognized as an abject loser, because it is recognized as synonymous with “disarming the public.” The new term permeating the Media Matters report is “GUN REFORM.” The left-wing online service singled me out (inaccurately) saying:
“Alan Korwin, author of 13 books on guns (I write books on gun laws, not guns, big difference, and it’s 10 books, so far), said reformers (there’s that word) ‘want to treat gun owners like the Negroes at the lunch counter.’ It’s worth noting that Korwin is considered the Frank Luntz of the pro-gun movement. Lauded by multiple speakers, he is the author of a ‘politically corrected’ gun glossary designed to focus the gun debate around a language of rights.”
The idea of “Negroes at the lunch counter” is an important metaphor, because modern-day anti-rights bigots would prevent people from exercising their specific enumerated right to bear arms by simply putting up signs, like they used to do to “coloreds” and other “undesirables.” This is not only offensive and an affront to humanity, it creates known-to-be dangerous make-believe gun-free zones, which have been shown to be reckless and negligent. “Specific enumerated right” is what the U.S. Supreme Court called the right to keep and bear arms.
Responding to the significant threat of defenseless zones, the preferred targets for psychopathic murderers, states are responding by introducing gun-free-zone liability acts. These proposals respect private property rights by leaving property owners free to create pretend gun-free zones by posting signs if they wish (with no other form of security provided), but holds the people posting the signs liable for any harm they cause.
You can ask your local representatives to introduce a gun-free-zone liability bill yourself, model language is here, with talking points: http://www.gunlaws.com/ModelLegislation.htm
Media Matters continues: “The notion that gun rights are basic civil and human rights is today at the very center of the movement’s political and legal strategies. The idea literally hung over last weekend’s GRPC proceedings in the form of a stage banner reading, ‘EQUAL GUN RIGHTS.’ Under it, speakers compared gun-policy reformers to segregationists and Nazis. Massad Ayoob, a Second Amendment Foundation board member, ended a defense of Stand Your Ground laws with Blackstone’s statement that ‘self-defense is the highest of all human rights.’ John Lott, the pro-gun academic, spoke of gun taxes as modern day poll taxes. ‘We need a document on how high fees and licensing taxes reduce gun ownership and are discriminatory,’ he said.”
Media Matters and I agree, this is about rights. Firearms are the litmus test of freedom. The degree to which a politician or a citizen can fully embrace the idea of firearm ownership, possession and use is the ultimate gauge of a person’s comfort level with ultimate freedom. That then gets us into the role and rule of law, justice and the righteous use of force, the non-aggression principle, the proper role of force in self defense, preemptive law… This is a discussion far to involved to get into here. Maybe I’ll get it into a book one day.
In the meanwhile, I do intend to pull a report together summarizing the best parts of the conference. But then, I intend to do a lot of things, far more than I can ever possibly do. Such is my fate. Now, it’s time to chill, and get ready for the gun show tomorrow. If I don’t cut this off right here, instead of larding it up with all the other amazing stuff I thought I would put into this Page Nine, you’ll never see it.
Latest posts by Special Contributor (see all)
- View from the North: Looking back at a 1977 game about Canadian civil conflict - November 19, 2017
- Congressman Biggs Votes for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act - November 16, 2017
- From Israel: Shifting Sands - November 15, 2017