Here’s Why Tom Brokaw’s Comments on Guns are Utterly Ridiculous
Right on cue, leftist, liberal Democrats and Hillary Clinton wasted no time after the tragic shooting incident in Las Vegas to advocate for gun control. It’s the same old song and dance routine after any incident involving a gun – common sense gun control laws are needed now, gun show loopholes should be closed, action needs to be taken to stop this kind of violence, and whatever “feel good” reason a political hack or news personality thinks up to infringe upon the right to bear arms. On Monday night, Tom Brokaw, appearing on NBC News covering the shooting in Las Vegas, stated, “It’s amazing what you can buy, at a gun show or illegally from other people.”
The video provided by The Daily Caller captures Brokaw saying a conversation cannot be held because of the emotional response of gun owners to gun control.
We can’t have that conversation because it immediately becomes so emotional between the gun owners of the America, who are protected by the NRA, and other people saying there ought to be a more reasonable ground. I’m a gun owner. I don’t have one of the AR-15s. I don’t need them. But almost all my friends out there have that kind of weapon.
Mr. Brokaw needs to understand a few points before providing commentary.
Mr. Brokaw, you need to understand the reason there can be no conversation on gun control – it is because the law is clear. The Second Amendment of the Constitution for the united States of America recognizes and guarantees the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms, which cannot be infringed by the government. No ifs, ands, buts, or maybes. The only “emotional” argument comes from leftist, liberal, communist, Marxist, socialist individuals and Democrats who subscribe to the statist view that government is the grantor of individual unalienable rights or has the authority to regulate individual unalienable rights.
Rights come from God, Mr. Brokaw, and precede any government, especially the united States government, which was formed by the people through the ratification of the Constitution for the united States of America. The Constitution conveys no rights to the people because the founders recognized rights existed prior to government and are given by God as stated in the Declaration of Independence. Rather, the Constitution limited government from infringing on the God-given individual unalienable rights of the people.
Now, as far as the National Rifle Association (NRA) is concerned, it would help you tremendously, Mr. Brokaw, if you read about the founding of the NRA and its expansion into the areas of politics and legislation. For your information, the NRA does not protect the gun owners of America as much as you think the organization does. Any law enacted by Congress; any “rule, regulation, or policy” enacted by the unconstitutional Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF); or, any “executive action” regarding firearms, is strictly prohibited by the Second Amendment’s “shall not be infringed” clause. Yet, the NRA supports certain Congressional legislation regarding firearms, such as HR 3668 and HR 38, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, which is in violation of the Second Amendment. So, truly, Mr. Brokaw, the NRA is not “protecting” gun owners in America since the association is willing to “bend” for Congress to infringe upon the Second Amendment.
As a gun owner, Mr. Brokaw, you should know there is never any “reasonable ground” when it comes to guns and gun control involving government, Democrats, or leftist, liberal, progressive, communist, socialist, Marxist individuals. It is “their way or the highway.” Moreover, it is already established that “government,” particularly the above-mentioned sect of the population, wants to be the only sect determining what is “reasonable.” But, the most important aspect that governs this entire situation is the type of government the people established. The united States is a constitutional republic whereby government protects individual God-given unalienable rights. This republic is not a democracy, whereby the majority rules; nor, is this government an aristocracy, whereby the elite rule. So, even if a “majority” wants to infringe on someone else’s God-given rights or the political elite, wealthy or news “celebrities” want to limit an individual right, it is the function of government to protect it.
And, by the way, your guns locked up in a cabinet in Montana will do you no good should you need to defend yourself from criminals or a tyrannical government.
Mr. Brokaw, you should know that an AR-15 is nothing more than a semi-automatic type of rifle. It is the different aesthetic appearance that “unnerves” some individuals. Because of your limited knowledge, semi-automatic is the firing of one projectile with each squeeze of the trigger. While no individual may “need” an AR-15 or another type of semi-automatic rifle, the issue is not need but “right” to possess firearms comparable to those used by government military. No, Mr. Brokaw, no one “needs” a tank either, but an individual has the “right” to possess one.
Not to confuse you any more than you already are, Mr. Brokaw; but, the news media, which includes you, has done a fantastic job of misrepresenting, twisting, and fabricating information regarding the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. You people keep calling our government a “democracy” instead of a “republic” as the founders established. News media personalities are too interested in hearing what some lame brain celebrity or sports figure has to say about “government,” “politics,” and the Constitution than actually talking to someone that knows. You and your colleagues are guilty of fabricating “news” or perpetuating a falsehood, such as Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. After that tidbit was proven false, news media “talking heads” and “Silicone Barbies” continued to dissect it, muse about it, analyze it and make predictions on future events amounting to “chewing on an issue til it loses its flavor then sticking it in your hair” as Vivianne Joan Abbott Walker said in The Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood.
But, I digress.
Any “gun control” or “reasonable ground” regarding firearms always targets law-abiding citizens. The reason is that criminals will break the law, regardless. A criminal will not care about any unconstitutional law addressing firearms – these individuals will still find access to whatever they want. It isn’t law-abiding individuals that should worry anyone; it is the criminals. And, the only equalizer between those who observe the law and those who violate it is the right of the people to keep and bear arms. But, the Second Amendment’s main function is protecting the people against a tyrannical government, preserving all other God-given unalienable individual rights recognized and guaranteed in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution for the united States of America.
Simply put, Mr. Brokaw, every member of both chambers of Congress should honor their oath of office to support, protect and defend the Constitution and stop with despotic and tyrannical legislation. For any law passed by Congress outside their constitutional authority is a usurpation; the people should treat it as such.
These are all simple facts, Mr. Brokaw, relayed without any emotion. There is no need to be emotional when one is dealing in facts. And, if those of us who remind people like you of the facts become emotional, the main emotion is frustration – frustration that too many in this republic remain “stuck on stupid” or engage in “willful ignorance” to the point of being detrimental to freedom and liberty.
Do us all a favor, Mr. Brokaw. Educate yourself on the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence before you spout off more misrepresentations, personal opinion, and/or twisting of the facts regarding firearms and firearm ownership. The continued propaganda peddled by you and the rest of the lamestream enemedia is old and stale; plus, it results in people who support the Constitution sounding like a broken record when it should not be necessary.
Article by Suzanne Hamner