The Talk Of Compensated Confiscation Can Not Be Justified

Today, at Bearing Arms Cam Edwards has a post on his appearance on the Laura Ingraham Show last night entitled Laura Ingraham: Dems Don't See Bearing Arms as "Real Right." Of course they don't, because they don't really see the Constitution as it is, but how they would like it to be. They see the right to vote as a "real right" though it is not mentioned in the Constitution. They see a "woman's right to choose" as a "real right" though it too is not in the Constitution. They constantly refer to the United States as a democracy, but it is in fact a republic.  But they don't see the Right to Keep and Bear Arms as a real right. This then allows them to propose that all sorts of guns should simply be confiscated. And to do so, they are willing to lie through their teeth to take away guns from their lawful owners.

As Ingraham noted, “these are not reasonable restrictions. These are mandatory ‘buybacks’. It’s gun confiscation.” That’s exactly what it is. It is not door-to-door confiscation, but it is confiscation nonetheless. “Give us your gun and we’ll give you a little money, but if you don’t you’re a criminal” is not a voluntary exchange of goods for cash. It’s compensated confiscation.

Ingraham was also correct in pointing out that most of the violent crime in this country doesn’t take place in the rural, red areas where lots of people own firearms. Instead, deep-blue cities that have done their best to eradicate a culture of lawful gun ownership lead the way in violent crime and homicides. It’s why guys like Maj Toure of Black Guns Matter, Kevin Dixie of No Other Choice Firearms Training, Aaargo Jay, and so many other gun owners in urban areas are fighting not just to protect their rights, but to restore that good gun culture in the cities where they live.

These calls for ever more and ever more intrusive and tyrannical gun controls flies in the face of the fact that there is less crime today even though there are more guns in circulation:

And yet, as I pointed out on Fox News last night, violent crime went down last year, not up. Homicides dropped by 6% across the nation, even as millions of guns were purchased. The fundamental tenet of the gun control movement is “more guns = more crime”, but the reality is that since the early 1990’s, we’ve added millions of firearms every year, and our violent crime rates are about half what they were at their peak almost 30 years ago. Now, that doesn’t automatically mean that more guns equates to less crime, but it certainly disproves the idea that the more guns there are, the more crime there will be.

The emphasis is mine. But it bears repeating. While the fact that the crime rate has in fact gone down (and most people killed by guns are suicides, while people killed in mass shootings account for a few hundred a year) while gun have increased doesn't prove the "more guns = less crime" narrative, it certainly disproves the "more guns = more crime" meme being pushed by the Democrats and their media whores.

The gun control movement is, at its heart, a prohibitionary movement. Its progress is measured, not in terms of whether or not we as a nation are becoming more or less safe, but how many guns are taken out of circulation, or by how many Americans are persuaded, pressured, or adjudicated not to own firearms. Oh sure, gun control advocates sometimes acknowledge violent crime rates as opposed to individual acts of violence. When crime goes down after a gun control law is passed, for example, it is heralded as a sign of gun control’s effectiveness. But when crime goes up after new gun control laws are put in place (as we’ve seen in Colorado, for example) it’s not seen as a failure of gun control. In fact, it’s not seen at all. Gun control advocates studiously avoid talking about or even acknowledging the increase in crime, and if forced to admit that “yes, crime is up”, it’s only to argue that we simply need even more gun control laws.

Here, I have to disagree with Mr. Edwards. Not because he is incorrect; in fact he is entirely correct. Colorado has seen an increase in crime, probably because the criminal element has followed the liberal exodus from Kalifornia, where they have fouled their nest, and now are fouling it in Colorado as well by voting the same way they did in their previous home. Cam is correct to point that out. However, we who write about such things must always make sure that people understand that our right to bear arms is a pre-existent right granted by our Creator and acknowledge in the Constitution. No government has the right to limit our rights. Similarly, no government has the right to grant a woman the right to abort her child. This talk of compensated confiscation can never be justified. I am sorry that Democrats don't see it that way, but it is true nonetheless.