When Did The Left Fall Out Of Love With Guns?
BY Herschel Smith
11 years, 9 months ago
From Joseph Farah:
How do you know the left is firmly in charge of the political and cultural establishment in America?
Because now they want to ban guns.
As a former leftist revolutionary during my misguided youth, I recall with crystal clarity when the radical left of the 1960s brazenly bore arms in public, boasted about firearms training, stockpiled arms and ammo and even engaged in armed violence against police.
The Black Panther Party, originally, by the way, the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, is a case in point. The organization, led by Bobby Seale and Huey Newton, were often referred to in the ’60s as “the vanguard of the revolution.”
They were known for ambushing police. Newton himself, after being freed from prison for the killing of Oakland police officer John Frey, boasted of murdering him. James Forman, Black Panther Party “minister of foreign affairs,” called for blowing up police stations, killing Southern governors and mayors and murdering 500 cops. They took full advantage of the Second Amendment and California laws that permitted the carrying of loaded rifles and shotguns in public, as long as they were not concealed or pointed at anyone. In May 1967, the Panthers literally invaded, fully armed, the State Assembly of the California Legislature. Later they organized an armed march on the state Capitol when lawmakers introduced legislation banning the carrying of loaded weapons in public.
All of this made them the heroes of the left. So-called “civil rights attorneys” like Charles Garry and William Kunstler and the American Civil Liberties Union defended them for their brazen calls for armed struggle, armed attacks and armed intimidation tactics.
But that was then, and this is now.
[ … ]
The only difference between now and then is who is running things.
[ … ]
The New Left, as it was known back then, worshipped firearms.
The new, new left does, too – as long as it maintains a monopoly on them and state power.
Yes, the left still loves guns. There is no other reason for the fawning acceptance of the vulgar SWAT raid tactics in which innocent men like Mr. Eurie Stamps get shot and killed. These tactics are repeated all across America every day.
The left just doesn’t love guns in the wrong hands, and anyone who isn’t an agent of the state is the wrong hands. Listen to Representative Jim Himes (D – CT) tell you why high capacity magazines are still necessary in government hands.
There is absolutely no justification for weapons that were made for the explicit purpose of killing lots of people quickly to be in the hands of civilians.
Let that wash over you again. “Killing lots of people quickly” and “civilian hands.” The two don’t go together.
Leftists are by nature not liberals, no matter what label they have adopted. Scratch a liberal, and find a Fascist.
On February 6, 2013 at 12:09 am, Mike said:
And the right, that Second Amendment loving right, doesn’t also fawningly accept the vulgar SWAT raids that go on across America?
On February 6, 2013 at 12:19 am, PacRim Jim said:
The Left hates gun for the very reason the Second Amendment exists:
It prevents their absolute government control of the American people.
On February 6, 2013 at 12:27 am, Seerak said:
Which “right”? Libertarians, or conservatives? The former were profoundly incensed by the murder of Jose Padilla, for example.
The Left is philosophically monolithic. The right is not.
On February 6, 2013 at 12:43 am, Robbins Mitchell said:
It isn’t the guns per se the lefties hate….it’s us
On February 6, 2013 at 1:00 am, Anonymous said:
Left/liberals like guns when they’re in their hands. Only.
“Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” –Mao
On February 6, 2013 at 6:00 am, John W. said:
To answer Mike’s question, no, we sure as h— don’t.
On February 6, 2013 at 6:11 am, John Shea said:
Consider this. Under current Supreme Court precedent, a police officer doing his job has no greater right to use deadly force than does a civilian. A police officer may use deadly force only to defend himself or another from a substantial threat of deadly force or great bodily harm. A police officer may not use deadly force just to apprehend a fleeing suspect or to make an arrest. The fleeing suspect must also present a substantial threat of death or great bodily harm to the officer or to others.
In other words, a police officer may use a firearm (the use of which is presumptively deadly force) only for self defense or the defense of another. That is precisely the right the Supreme Court recognized all civilians have in Heller and McDonald.
In view of the fact that police and civilians are governed by identical standards concerning the use of firearms, what reason is there then for arming the police with greater firepower for them to exercise that identical right?
On February 6, 2013 at 6:30 am, egoist said:
The New Left is now in charge of the government. And that is new news to a lot of people.
On February 6, 2013 at 6:42 am, Arty said:
I don’t care what side of the political debate you’re on Mike. SWATs and no-knock raids are now daily occurrences and sometimes innocent people are being terrorized and even dying in them. Think Germany in the 1930’s, the splintered doors, boots coming up the stairs, the yelling, the terrorized people inside. Is this the kind of country you want? Use your head Mike. Quit worrying about you neighbor’s gun and worry about criminals and a creeping police state and especially worry about a ***Civilian Defence Force equal to the military***. I know it’s hard to challenge your own beliefs but some things are so important you have to understand them thoroughly because you may only have one chance to get it right.
On February 6, 2013 at 7:38 am, nadadhimmi said:
What’s to worry? Barack said he would only raise taxes on millionaire’s and billionaire’s, NOT “working family’s”. And just look how much more tax Warren Buffet is paying now, it’s almost as much as his secretary! So now Barack said he wouldn’t take my handgun, rifle or shotgun and I BELIEVE him. After all, it’s not like there is any extra money being taken out of the paychecks of “working families” or anything like that. So anyone that doesn’t believe Barack is like, just, you know, a raaacist. (sarc off)
On February 6, 2013 at 7:55 am, Moneyrunner said:
Jim Hines (D – CT): Killing lots of people is government’s job.
The point about disarming the people is because you want to do something to them that they won’t like.
On February 6, 2013 at 8:26 am, Stump said:
The Congressman’s name is Himes, not Hines.
Editor’s remarks: Thanks for pointing that out and correcting my error. Revision made to article.
On February 6, 2013 at 9:50 am, jf said:
At what point in our history did police stop being considered civilians?
On February 6, 2013 at 10:10 am, Mike said:
The massive increase in the use of SWAT, no-knock raids, and the accompanying carve outs to the Fourth Amendment and rise in “collateral damage” killings by police is mostly a result of the War on Drugs, federal funding of local law enforcement and surplus Department of Defense weapons and gear being handed out like candy to civilian law enforcement. All of these things have been encouraged and cheered on by conservatives and Republicans for decades now. So please don’t try and blame the explosion of routine jack-booted SWAT tactics only on the left. The authoritarian, big and intrusive government conservative right has been an eager participant.
On February 6, 2013 at 10:16 am, Herschel Smith said:
Mike,
You’ve got to be kidding. You need to read my blog more instead of being an occasional reader, and read David Codrea, Mike Vanderboegh, Kurt Hofmann, Western Rifle Shooters, and so many other bloggers on SWAT raids.
Statist tactics are a favorite of statists, not conservatives or libertarians.
On February 6, 2013 at 10:24 am, Thomass said:
On February 6, 2013 at 12:09 am, Mike said:
“And the right, that Second Amendment loving right, doesn’t also fawningly accept the vulgar SWAT raids that go on across America?”
Nope. Most of us don’t and/or would like a lot more oversight of no knock and other raids / serving of warrants (a judge’s signature is not enough oversight). I think instapundit is one of the most popular conservative / libertarian blogs and this is a regular issue. Also; I don’t know if it is national but there is a lot of healthy skepticism of the police by California conservatives. We see a lot of abuse of power going on. If I were on a jury I would not automatically give a law enforcement officer deference to the honesty of his testimony for simply being a police officer.
On February 6, 2013 at 10:30 am, Thomass said:
On February 6, 2013 at 12:43 am, Robbins Mitchell said:
“It isn’t the guns per se the lefties hate….it’s us”
You nailed that.
On February 6, 2013 at 10:32 am, WendyKat said:
THANK YOU, jf!!! That is exactly what I have been saying for weeks – when the heck did we start recruiting police officers (and military personnel, to be honest) from the choirs of angels? No police officer has ever gone crazy and shot someone NOT in the line of duty? And didn’t a couple of veterans just get shot by a soldier with PTSD? *IF* semi-automatic weapons with a clip of more than 7 bullets are so horribly dangerous (and I’m not saying they are, btw), then NO ONE should be allowed to have them. No one. Allowing the government to have weapons that regular citizens are not permitted to have is exactly what the 2nd ammendment was intended to prevent. The Constitution was originall written right after we had to (forcibly) separate ourselves from a tyranical government and our whole system of government was set up with that in mind. Declaration of Independence: “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” Any time a government wants to use LAW to arm themselves better than their constituents, it is time to be scared.
On February 6, 2013 at 10:41 am, M. Report said:
Police ceased to be civilians, and moved up to the same level
as the military in their use of deadly weaponry, when the
Progressives changed the dictionary definition of ‘civilian’.
On February 6, 2013 at 10:58 am, Billll said:
Every Communist must grasp the truth, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party. Yet, having guns, we can create Party organizations, as witness the powerful Party organizations which the Eighth Route Army has created in northern China. We can also create cadres, create schools, create culture, create mass movements. Everything in Yenan has been created by having guns. All things grow out of the barrel of a gun. According to the Marxist theory of the state, the army is the chief component of state power. Whoever wants to seize and retain state power must have a strong army. Some people ridicule us as advocates of the “omnipotence of war”. Yes, we are advocates of the omnipotence of revolutionary war; that is good, not bad, it is Marxist. The guns of the Russian Communist Party created socialism. We shall create a democratic republic. Experience in the class struggle in the era of imperialism teaches us that it is only by the power of the gun that the working class and the labouring masses can defeat the armed bourgeoisie and landlords; in this sense we may say that only with guns can the whole world be transformed.
Mao Tse-tung
November 6, 1938
“If someone is so fearful that they are going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have any weapons at all!” — Democrat Congressman Henry A. Waxman (California).
On February 6, 2013 at 9:25 pm, DanInOregon said:
People are blown away when I tell them that my father bought an M1 carbine out of the Sears catalog and had it delivered to the house. This was the mid 1960’s California. No background checks, no sanity checks, no filling out federal forms, no waiting periods, no permits, etc. And the crime rates were far lower back then. This is how far our 2nd Amendment rights have eroded even it that short a timeframe. If the cops can have modern selective fire, REAL assault weapons, then I should have access to them too. So should any law abiding citizen.
On February 6, 2013 at 9:54 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Right on. M1 Carbine.
http://www.captainsjournal.com/2013/01/20/range-practice/
And I had to fill out form 4473. And yes Dan you’re right, along with John Shea concerning the use of firearms. I have pointed that out in posts on Tennessee v. Garner many times.
Make sure to visit again though. I like the discussion thread.
On February 7, 2013 at 2:37 pm, richard40 said:
To Mike and Hershel Smith. I think the truthful way of putting it is some elements of the right, especially those fully committed to the war on drugs, support these SWAT raids. And I beleive today the majority of the left also supports those tactics. What Mike is ignoring though is that most of the right is today trending in a libertarian direction, and libertarians universally oppose these SWAT raids. So if you want to see these kind of SWAT raids stopped or controlled, you are far more likely to find supporters on the right than on the left. For example I see no support from Obama on reigning them in, and in fact Obama has expanded them to previous agencies that did not have swat teams, like the EPA and the education dept. The real truth is Statists, left or right, support these kind of swat raids, but those committed to liberty do not.
On February 7, 2013 at 2:42 pm, richard40 said:
So basically this article is saying that the hard left supported gun rights when they were not in power, but now oppose them. Pretty typical of the left, no lasting committment to principle, just a lust for power.
On February 7, 2013 at 2:45 pm, richard40 said:
A similar thing happened on the left on free speech, when they used to pretty much absolutely support free speech, but now in the age of PC, hate speech, videos that muslims dont like, and paid for political speech, the left has turned into the main enemy of free speech. And once again only libertarians have consistently defended liberty and freedom.