How Gun Control Will Lead To Communism

After every high profile crime committed with a firearm of any sort, there are always calls for gun control. But one particular proposal this week managed to distinguish itself amid the usual din, if only for its audacity and what it reveals about the mindset of people who wish to disarm their fellow Americans.

In a lengthy article in Washington Monthly, private equity investor William V. Glastris, Jr. pitched a plan under which the federal government would obtain the means of handgun production, ban handgun importation, and target the current private handgun stock with a massive, nationwide “buyback.” The plan’s ultimate goal would be for “the government to significantly lower the supply—and thereby raise the price—of handguns … .”

Glastris admits the proposal is “not modest” but insists “Americans deserve broad, sweeping reforms,” rather than “years of painstaking incrementalism … .” He also dismisses the more conventional gun control agenda of banning semiautomatic rifles and “high capacity” magazines, closing the “gun show loophole,” and imposing categorical prohibitions on certain criminals. “[I[t is hard to argue that these reforms, even if they all went into effect, would do much more than put a modest dent in the problem,” Glastris writes.

There will come a time, Glastris speculates, when “Democrats control both the White House and Congress.” He continues, “When that moment arrives, wouldn’t it be better if, instead of debating marginal fixes, there were new ideas on the table to actually address the root of the problem by substantially reducing the number of guns in circulation?”

Of course, there have been other “visionaries” who have dreamed of common ownership of the means of production. Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin come to mind.

And while Glastris is admittedly limiting his proposal only to the means of producing handguns, it still suffers from the inherent problems that have doomed similar ideological projects throughout history.

Glastris argues that his plan could be implemented “without infringing on Americans’ right to bear arms,” yet the whole point is to reduce the availability and raise the price of what the U.S. Supreme Court has called “the quintessential self-defense weapon.” If the same plan were implemented with regard to books, no one would dare claim that it did not violate the First Amendment.

It would also discriminate against the poor, who often live in the areas where police protection is stretched the thinnest and the need for self-defense may be especially acute.

Needless to say, the proposal would inevitably generate a massive federal registry of handgun purchasers, and with government controlling production, bureaucrats could require “safety” features long coveted by those who hate guns and shunned by those who actually own and use them. Besides “smart gun” gadgets that supposedly limit firing to “authorized users,” these could conceivably include monitoring or even remote override “features” that would give the government ultimate veto power over the gun’s use.

There is also the risk of corruption inherent in any government-run rationing scheme. This is a regular feature of regimes under which the government treats access to handguns as a state-granted privilege, rather than a fundamental right. Look no further than New York City, which has seen multiple prosecutions in recent years related the city’s pay-to-play issuance of handgun licenses.

Leave it to a left-leaning private equity investor to assume that Americans’ fundamental rights are merely one more type of commodity that can be bought and sold in a highly-manipulated market. Of course, left-leaning oligarchs regard American democracy itself that way, as something that can be had for a price and then used to suit their personal ends and preferences. And, they’ve spent heavily to ensure their chosen party controls Congress after November 6 and will no doubt be expecting a return on their investment in the form of public policy that meets their approval.

Gun owning Americans will have the chance to prove them wrong this Election Day.

And every firearm owner should go to the polls understanding the gun grabbers are dreaming big.

Big enough even to suggest one of history’s most destructive and sinister political and economic ideologies as the template for civilian disarmament.

source: nraila.org

  • John Donovan

    Glastris? Another poorly educated D bag from Chicago. Kellogg school of Biz and a liflelong Democrat.

    Guys looks like…and is a soft doughy middle-aged white pussy.

  • Priam Figs

    We get millions of Illegal Aliens and Millions of pounds of drugs from south of the Border. Do these people actually think we can’t get guns too? Do these people think passing legislation making Millions of people criminals if they fail to comply will go over without resistance? And with what is being proposed it will be armed resistance. What are they going to do, create a shit storm and go hide in their bunkers until the dust settles?

  • Rick Alenn

    Well I see the whole proposal as a recipe for one hell of a violent bloody civil war. So by all means you little Commie SACKS OF SHIT. Bring it on, the sooner the better.

    • The sooner we get to it the sooner we get through it because we can’t stop it !

  • Glenn Saulsbury

    Funny how the democrats want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment and that’s okay! Trump wants to change the 14th Amendment. And the democrats say that can’t be done. So how in the hell can they make changes and that’s okay?
    democrats are nothing else but a bunch of idiots

    • Jon

      Idiots with a Global socialist agenda backed by Soros and the U.N.

  • Timothy Toroian

    I already thought everybody knew that especially the “Controllers”. You can’t have that kind of gun control without tyranny and you can’t have tyranny without gun control. There is only one good kind of communist. They used to say the same thing about Indians in Westerns from the 30s and 40s.

  • Donald Ort

    My primary charge card is a Cabela’s credit card, which credits the account with a percentage of $ spent. Since I am 83 years old and have all the gear Ihat I need already, I USE THE ACCRUED CABELA’S $ TO BUY MORE FIREARMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    THE ASSAULT ON THE 2ND (AND MOST IMPORTANT) AMMENDMENT IS ACCELERATING AND IF NOT ENDED SOON, WILL DOOM THE USA TO THE SAME FATE AS ANCIENT ROME, GREECE, RUSSIA, CHINA , ETC.
    I DO NOT WANT TO BE PART OF A GENERATION OF AMERICANS WHO “SCREWED THE POOCH AND LOST THE REPUBLIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • apzzyk

    This is just an alarmist myth that has been present in the US beginning mostly in the 20th century. This seems to have started after WWII when more people could afford to have private weapons that were not used to provide food. My original ancestor in CO came here for the gold in 1849 or 1850, and at that time only had a shotgun which he used to provide food for his family, and later, when he became an underground miner with 4 others, they took turns guarding their combined claims from possible claim jumpers until Central City got a town marshal and deputies to take over this role. He and his partners sold their claims, and he moved down to the plains and started a freight line hauling supplies to the mining camps. At this time he needed a rifle to protect his live stock from preditors, like cyotes, mountain lions, and bears, all of which are still something of a problem in the same area. Since he and his new son-in-law, my great grandfather, as property owners, were members of the Colorado Militia at the time of Sand Creek, we only hope that they were in the Regiment which tried to shield the Indians from, the foot Regiment under Col. Shivington who took part in the Massacre. My father’s generation were all gun owners and hunters, but only hunted as ‘recreation’, but never regarded their firearms as necessary for self protection since from the time they became adults before 1925, we have had law enforcement. I am the last male living in the area now, and the last time I had a firearm was when I was in the USMC (1957-61). When I was younger I hunted with friends using a single shot .22 and .410 shotgun. My aunt, who happened to be an alcoholic, had her pistol, which was stolen from her by my father for the welfare of all.
    In the 1960’s when I was in college, I had a research position which gave me access to the forest research camp for CSU, and one week end I got permission to bring some friends with me and camp at the research facility. One of the couples went away from our campsite and came back with the news that there was a group of men, who were armed, illegally camping over a ridge. Another vet and I went toward their camp, with the intent to tell them that they were on the grounds illegally to ask them to leave. They had obviously been drinking, so we just waited until all but a ‘sentry’ had gone to bed. We captured the sentry, extinguished their fire, and then captured the rest of the group, took away their firearms and clothing, leaving them bound. We made several trips to the research buildings with their firearms and after they were removed, we used the emergency phone on the outside of the research building to call the local authorities, who came and took them into custody. The center director gave the confiscated firearms to University Security. Several years later, right before I left the University, I found that the confiscated firearms were still in the custody of University Security. We had done these people a favor, because they were only charged with tresspassing and not the more severe offense of having a firearm on university property, which carried a mandatory jail sentence. I also learned that this group were members of the ‘Minute Man” militia that were going to save us from a Communist invasion or uprising.
    If we look around all all of the rest of the Western nations, we are the only one with a 2nd Amendment, and now our homicide rate for gun deaths is more per year than are highway deaths. Last week I got a Facebook message from a far more conservative neighbor that her grandson and his friends were planning on going to the border to try to keep the ‘invading caravan’ from crossing the border. If that is the case, then this might be the event that will lead to the strict gun control measures given above, because of the blood shed that is almost certain to happen. I would ask that if anyone who reads this has any knowledge of anyone who might go to the border to try to discourage that from happening, just for the sake of domestic tranquility.

    • Huck Finn

      You apparently have no knowledge of history. Not only of our nation or the nations in the past, who had their weapons confiscated and then they were murdered by the very folks who took away their ability to defend themselves. If you think this is a myth,then you haven’t read history or you just live in some liberal leftist delusion, that this can’t happen here! Watch DiNesh D’Souza’s newest film,”Death of a Nation,” Then tell me it cannot happen here.

      • apzzyk

        What you seems to have cited is probably the sequil to W. D. Griffth]s Birth of a Nation which showed us how the Klan saved us after the civil war, and which may have lead the Klan to have great political influence before WWII, which is still causing us problems. The only case in history that I can recall where firearms played a major part in taking over power was in the first Russian Revolution in 1917, when the peasants killed all of the nobility, who did have armed guards for themselves, but had to be bribed to buy troops for their troops, which pissed of the relatives of the troops, who were not bothered by the firearms of the guards and killed them along with the nobility. This left the door open for the 2nd Russian revolution of 1917 which brought Lenin to power. There has been no case in Western History where the government confiscated war type of firearms from their people and then did bad things to the ones who they had disarmed, so give me the chance to see what you are talking about. Go for it and be specific!

        • Huck Finn

          First, in 1919 (about nine years before the rise of the National Socialists), the German post-World War I government passed the Verordnung des Rates der Volksbeauftragen über Waffenbesitz (Regulations of the Council of the People’s Delegates on Weapons Possession). A reaction to the increasing presence of communists in Germany, this gun control law mandated, “All firearms, as well as all kinds of firearms ammunition, are to be surrendered immediately.” Anyone who was found in possession of a gun or ammunition could be punished by up to five years imprisonment and a fine of 100,000 marks.

          As agents of the German military enforced this law throughout Germany, in order to accelerate the seizure of all weapons and ammunition, the decision was made to install what might be called in modern political parlance a “Disarmament Czar.” Call for a gun control czar. Sound familiar?

          On August 7, 1920, the German government passed the Gesetz über die Entwaffnung der Bevölkerung (Law on the Disarmament of the People). This law created the office of Reichskommissar for Disarmament of the Civil Population. This official was tasked with making a list of “military weapons” that were subject to immediate seizure. Sound familiar?

          Perhaps the most frightening and foreboding provision of the law was that requiring all citizens with knowledge of anyone hoarding ammo or who owned outlawed weapons to turn in to the Reichskommissar the names of these people. Neighbors spying on neighbors. Sound familiar?

          The next step in the complete disarmament of Germany prior to Hitler’s wresting of absolute power was the passage in 1928 of the Gesetz über Schußwaffen und Munition (Law on Firearms and Ammunition). This law required licensing of anyone who manufactured, assembled, or repaired firearms and ammunition. This included private citizens who reloaded their own rounds. Trade and sale of arms and ammo was also forbidden without a license, including at gun shows and competitive shooting events. Sound familiar?

          The license to own a weapon provided for in the 1928 law was called a Waffenschein. This carry license was issued at the will of the government, and an applicant was required to show that his “reliability is not in doubt” and that he had a particular need for a firearm. Psychological testing for a gun license. Sound familiar?

          Further, this law placed caps on the types and numbers of weapons and ammunition that could be owned, even by those with licenses. Persons who owned more than five guns or more than 100 rounds of ammunition would have to seek a special license for such an “arsenal.” Caps on ammo. Sound familiar?

          Progressive? The disarmament of the population certainly did progress rapidly. As legal scholar Stephen Halbrook wrote in an extraordinarily thorough article published in 2000 in the Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law:

          Within a decade, Germany had gone from a brutal firearms seizure policy which, in times of unrest, entailed selective yet immediate execution for mere possession of a firearm, to a modern, comprehensive gun control law. Passed by a liberal republic, this law ensured that the police had records of all firearms acquisitions (or at least all lawful ones) and that the keeping and bearing of arms were subject to police approval. This firearms control regime was quite useful to the new government that came to power a half decade later.

          On March 23, 1933, the Reichstag (German parliament) passed, by a vote of 441 to 94, a measure called the Enabling Act permitting Hitler to make laws without consulting the Reichstag. The president issuing decrees without consulting Congress. Sound familiar?

          Finally, within a week of assuming autocratic control of the lawmaking power in Germany, Hitler issued the following order regarding gun ownership:

          The units of the national revolution, SA, SS, and Stahlhelm, offer every German man with a good reputation the opportunity to join their ranks for the fight. Therefore, whoever does not belong to one of these named units and nevertheless keeps his weapon without authorization or even hides it, must be viewed as an enemy of the national government and will be held responsible without hesitation and with the utmost severity.

          And, in case there were any doubts about the seriousness of the severity, a newspaper entry announcing the edict informed citizens: “If we find military weapons or ammunition after 31 March 1933, we will be forced to proceed ruthlessly.”

          This brief, irrefutable recitation of the “progress” of German gun control laws and executive orders demonstrates that there is more than just incidental similarity and that the fear of future firearms seizures by the government is historically sound and not just “paranoid fantasies” of the far-right.

          Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American

        • Huck Finn
        • Huck Finn

          Below are the specifics! Check it out! Also! The Film “Death of a Nation!” has nothing to do with Birth of a Nation.

  • metheoldsarge

    When the government fears the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny.

  • Patrick Feeney

    William V. Glastris Jr. wants to make decent, honest citizens defenseless against the criminals that already have guns. Of course this elitist fancy ass rich boy will have plenty of body guards to protect him. That’s like gun control advocate Michael Bloomberg. Last I heard he has seventeen armed body guards.

  • raymond

    well good people…the Republicans are cowards and afraid to stand up to the Deomocrats….just look at the current

    elections being stolen by the deomcrats and the cowardly Repubs are just standing by and letting it happen without
    a whimper……….so as far as guns and gun control goes , the Deomcrats WILL most definitely get their wishes of more

    weapons bans and finally confiscation while the 2nd amendment will be abolished and the tough talking consertatives

    will put up little if any resistance to their guns being taken, either voluntairly or by force…..just look at the current liberal
    protests and consertative bashing and threatening without any reprisal or resistance……good luck with your wishful

    thinking on guns……

    • William The WarLord

      Do not worry so much Raymond.There are 30 million of us who are prepared to take matters into our own hands the minute the first gun confiscation scheme begins.Any Traitors who have violated their Oaths to defend the Constitution from all enemies Foreign or Domestic will not last the week.Those who are not shot while attempting to escape will be put on trial for treason.Only the truly ignorant think Americans would ever surrender their weapons or allow the government to confiscate them.That was tried once before and did not end well for the poor Lobsterbacks who’s Officers thought they could get away with violating our inalienable right to be armed.Guns are here to stay and the government has no power to take them away!

      I hope you have good hiking boots Raymond,it is a long walk to UN Camp Obama on the South side of the Great Trump Wall of Freedom from where you are.

  • Jim McCormack

    Hope this happens before I die. I’d love to use my Vets experience to shut down the filthy creeps of Antifa and their mob mentality who never fought for America and it’s good people. Little Communist rats who hit from behind , live on hate, and get paid from Soros traitors.

  • Cubianer

    I already thought everybody knew that especially the “Controllers”. You can’t have that kind of gun control without tyranny and you can’t have tyranny without gun control. There is only one good kind of communist. They used to say the same thing about Indians in Westerns from the 30s and 40s.

  • SargentoDorffy

    well good people…the Republicans are cowards and afraid to stand up to the Deomocrats….just look at the currentelections being stolen by the deomcrats and the cowardly Repubs are just standing by and letting it happen withouta whimper……….so as far as guns and gun control goes , the Deomcrats WILL most definitely get their wishes of moreweapons bans and finally confiscation while the 2nd amendment will be abolished and the tough talking consertativeswill put up little if any resistance to their guns being taken, either voluntairly or by force

  • Casper

    I already thought everybody knew that especially the “Controllers”. You can’t have that kind of gun control without tyranny and you can’t have tyranny without gun control. There is only one good kind of communist. They used to say the same thing about Indians in Westerns from the 30s and 40s.

  • Kayla

    When the government fears the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny.

  • JeffCity

    Funny how the democrats want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment and that’s okay! Trump wants to change the 14th Amendment. And the democrats say that can’t be done. So how in the hell can they make changes and that’s okay?democrats are nothing else but a bunch of idiots

  • Mandy-Lu

    Funny how the democrats want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment and that’s okay! Trump wants to change the 14th Amendment. And the democrats say that can’t be done. So how in the hell can they make changes and that’s okay?democrats are nothing else but a bunch of idiots

  • kinghaller

    Funny how the democrats want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment and that’s okay! Trump wants to change the 14th Amendment. And the democrats say that can’t be done. So how in the hell can they make changes and that’s okay?democrats are nothing else but a bunch of idiots

  • gabrielle robert

    My primary charge card is a Cabela’s credit card, which credits the account with a percentage of $ spent. Since I am 83 years old and have all the gear Ihat I need already, I USE THE ACCRUED CABELA’S $ TO BUY MORE FIREARMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!THE ASSAULT ON THE 2ND (AND MOST IMPORTANT) AMMENDMENT IS ACCELERATING AND IF NOT ENDED SOON, WILL DOOM THE USA TO THE SAME FATE AS ANCIENT ROME, GREECE, RUSSIA, CHINA , ETC

  • sasha

    Below are the specifics! Check it out! Also! The Film “Death of a Nation!” has nothing to do with Birth of a Nation.