Every so often, we get a picture -- with crystal clarity -- of the kind of country the radical "gun rights" crowd wants America to be. It allows us to understand just how much is at stake in the gun control debate.
It apparently is not enough for opponents of the President's health care proposals to bring their signs and their voices to town hall meetings and Presidential speeches. Now they are bringing their guns.
Last week we were treated to a series of spectacles that had many rubbing their eyes in disbelief: an Arizona constituent of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords dropping a handgun while attending a "meet and greet" with Rep. Giffords at a local Safeway; a man bringing a concealed handgun to a town hall meeting with Rep. Steve Cohen of Memphis; a New Hampshire man standing outside the venue for a Presidential appearance on health care reform with a pistol openly strapped to his thigh.
The craziness continued this week. On Monday, a dozen people openly carrying guns were among the Obama protesters outside the Phoenix convention center where the President was giving a speech, including a gentleman who walked around with an AR-15 assault rifle strapped to his back, to say nothing of his openly-displayed handgun.
Judging from the public commentary about these stories, most Americans regard this behavior as bizarre, intimidating and dangerous, with frightening implications for the President's safety in particular. But it is important not to treat these incidents of public gun-carrying as merely the misguided behavior of a few individuals. It is more than that. What we are seeing is the acting out of two central tenets of the extremist "gun rights" ideology long espoused by the National Rifle Association and other radical Second Amendment absolutists.
The first tenet is that the more that law abiding citizens carry guns in public, the safer all of us will be. This view has led to a broadly successful campaign by the NRA to require authorities in most states to give out permits to carry concealed weapons to any adult without a criminal record. Once this beachhead was taken, the gun lobby moved methodically to allow concealed carry into more and more public places, including bars, churches, workplace parking lots, airports, parks, college campuses -- the list goes on and on. Indeed, in the infamous Thune Amendment, recently stopped in the Senate by only two votes, the gun lobby sought to protect gun carrying across state lines in complete derogation of the limits some states have placed on concealed carry licenses.
Much of the media attention to the recent spate of gun carriers has focused on their willingness to carry "openly" in full public view. A gun strapped to the thigh of an angry protester makes for great TV. But many Americans who find themselves appalled by these guns in plain sight need to realize that they are also exposed to the less visible risk of their fellow citizens carrying concealed weapons. Less visible, that is, until one of the "law abiding citizens" with a concealed carry permit commits a criminal act, like Richard Poplowski shooting and killing three police officers in Pittsburgh, Michael McLendon killing ten people in a rampage through rural Alabama, or George Soldini murdering three women and wounding nine others at a Pittsburgh-area fitness club.
That the Obama protesters are choosing to carry their guns openly implicates a second core principle of the radical "gun rights" ideology: the insurrectionist view of Second Amendment rights. This is the belief -- long a staple of NRA propaganda - that the Second Amendment is really about giving the people the right to resist their own government if it becomes a "tyranny". As an NRA official put it some years ago, "the Second Amendment... is literally a loaded gun in the hands of the people held to the heads of government." Whether the government has become a "tyranny" apparently is up to the individual to decide. For Timothy McVeigh, who had thoroughly absorbed this insurrectionist ideology, the Waco tragedy was sufficient justification to bomb a federal building in Oklahoma City.
The point of openly carrying guns at political events is to make a political statement and to do it in the most intimidating way possible. The statement is this: "You can have all the debates you want, but if laws are passed that I regard as 'tyranny,' I reserve the right to resist them by force of arms." The New Hampshire pistol-packer held a sign paraphrasing Thomas Jefferson's famous quotation, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." In a later interview he warned that "we're traveling down a road at breakneck speed that's toward tyranny," suggesting that the time to refresh the tree of liberty may be fast approaching.
The Phoenix assault rifle carrier chillingly explained, "we will forcefully resist people imposing their will on us through the strength of the majority with a vote." In other words, the right to vote may give us the appearance of equality as citizens, but being armed makes some of us more equal than others. Or, in the words of the NRA's Wayne LaPierre recently speaking to the Conservative Political Action Committee, "the guys with the guns make the rules."
So there you have it. The radical "gun rights" vision of the ideal America. Guns in every corner of American society -- concealed or carried openly for all to see -- threatening our safety and our democracy. For most Americans, the "gun rights" vision is nothing but a nightmare.
For more information, see Dennis Henigan's new book, Lethal Logic: Exploding the Myths that Paralyze American Gun Policy.
Paul Helmke: GOP Senator Identifies Gun Violence As Major Factor In Health Care Crisis
Loading comments… 
How many news articles and threads have we seen about what Obama said at that that forum, compared to how many articles and threads we've seen about some guy carrying an unloaded centerfire .22 in an unsecured area nowhere near the President, and what he and his friends may or may not have said?
Burying Obama's message under a flood of ZOMG SCAWY GUN!! stories wasn't unintentio
This publicity stunt was a red herring that should be ignored, but thanks to MSM gun-obsess
Could be anyone posting that, John. I wouldn't read too much into it. There have been no mass shootings committed this year by leftist radicals, can't say the same for the other side, though.
Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 PM on 08/21/2009
----------
so i guess you can provide a link to the political affiliatio
Guns at such events inhibit free speech, an activity that the First Amendment was partly designed to protect, and infringe the right of the people “peaceably to assemble,” since many will avoid attending an event where they think gunfire might erupt.
Our republican form of government depends upon the expression of ideas without intimidati
The founders weren't so stupid people. Part of the intent of the "militia" and right to bear arms aspects of the 2nd Amendment was to keep the government from creating and maintaing a large standing military . . . had their intent been followed, had Iraq required the wholesale call-up of ordinary citizens . . . Bush's idiocy would have gone nowhere.
If our society no longer requires citizen ownership of guns, change the Constituti
If their intent had been followed, the wholesale call-up of orfinary citizens would have been to no avail, since the militia, both historical
If the intent of the framers had been followed, a wholesale callup of the militia would have been to noavai, since, both historical
The constituio
We already have these restrictio
"Making threats against our elected Senators and Congress is they do not adhere to their way of thinking. That is terrorism as defined by the federal government
And when has this "terrorism
PS- I'm a liberal gun-owner too. There are lots of us.
There are.
"amount of guns purchased"
Purchase of more than one has to be reported to the BATFE.
"and restrictio
Again, there are.
I know a place where the government won't bother these folks and they can have as many weapons as they can hold on to:
Somalia!
That is really what they advocate, is anarchy where "the guys with the guns make the rules" as LaPierre says.
No, they aren't. Nobody with a gun was inside the secure zone set up by the Secret Service. Never have been, never will be. That's why they call it a 'secure zone'. The anti-2nd Amendment bloggers keep failing to mention that. They make it sound like these protesters were waiting in line to walk up and shake Obama's hand.
"Following his victory, retail armaments dealers were overrun with panicked customers stocking up on guns and ammo for fear that the nasty black man was going to take their second amendment rights away."
While he was campaignin
Spot on, Mr. Hennigan. Thanks for this editorial. It's great to see so many standing up against the unbelievab
Anti-democ
"Treasonou
Now you're letting your emotions get the best of you, which is not unusual for the anti-gun side.
By the way, the United States is a constituti
To wit, lefties who are so unsympathe
And yes, I'm armed in part to protect myself from right-wing crazies. And left-wing petty criminals in my old neighborho
As the quoted paragraph from 1789 says, the best security of the right to militia service lay in the "the military spirit, that taste for martial exercises, which has always distinguis
Stop the proliferat
If there were no fireamrs, wouldn't they just show up with clubs?
Not an "Honor Guard" for the politician
Just because a person's skin or rifle is black is not a reason to disparage either one I.M.O.
Nothing like being on the defensive to sharpen the edges of one's arguments and views.
If we were truly having "reasonabl
They may intend well, but they tend to an approach that, to me, clearly signals attack and an emphasis on tactical gains ('getting legislatio
Hence our "whining".
If "guns in every corner..." is their vision, hasn't that already been achieved? I remember a USA Today report some time last year that stated there were about 9 guns per every 10 US citizens. That certainly sounds like the country has guns everywhere
Also, if you are implying that most Americans are not in the "gun rights" crowd, or disagree with them, how do you explain all time lows in support for gun control according to pew research reports that came out last Dec.? Or the practicall
Mr. Henigan can you please respond?
In the Second Amendment’
Under the Second Amendment, the federal government was prohibited from infringing the right of the people to the security of a well regulated militia..
LOL... Wrong.
The militia statement merely shows a reason why the right to arms shall not be infringed. It does not show why or when the right exists.
Instead of sloganizin
The right of the people to keep and bear arms, for whatever reason, already existed long before the constituti
But, since you are such a big fan of militias, you'll no doubt be pleased to learn that you are in one, as are most people.
Welcome to the 'unorganiz
http://www
And continued mangling of the 2nd Amendment is pointless. It guarantees the individual right to own firearms. Period. Get used to it.
Wait and see what happens when Chicago's gun ban gets to court.
So which authority is responsibl
The way you make it sound is that those people would have been less violent without a concealed carry permit.
I'd like to know where all of their (Brady Campaign too) concern for cops was, when 5 Philadelph
Most of these anti 2A people are only concerned when a crime is committed by someone who has a CCW permit. If they were concerned about criminals, they wouldn't argue with us when we advocate long jail sentences for violent criminals. Instead, they whine about prison overcrowdi