Leftists Have No Other Principle Than Power For Themselves

 The other day I had a post by Ranjit Singh in which he pointed out that not everyone from India is a pacificist.  The demanding moms had brought up the attack in a Sikh temple as a way to talk about their Cause, which is disarmament for you and me.  Today, Singh has another article at Bearing Arms entitled Moms Demand Action admits it's the who, not the how, with violence. Moms Demand Action is one of a number of gun grabber groups that use lies, cherry picked data, inflated statistics, or just made up sh*t, in order to fool the general public into supporting the Cause. It reminds one of the Muslim principle of taqiyya, which is to lie in the furtherance of Islam. But I digress.

It is in the gun controllers’ DNA to lie, repeat lies, double down on lies when called out, dissemble, cherry pick and inflate statistics, and then call YOU a liar for pointing out their lies. But they have no shame or remorse about lying because it’s for The Cause for disarming all of us.

According to Moms Demand Action on X, formerly twitter:

Six years ago today, a protest by white supremacists over the removal of a Confederate statue in Charlottesville, VA, escalated into violence, and a white supremacist killed 32-year-old counter-protester Heather Heyer.

The fact that Heyer was killed with a car BY ThE WHITE SUPREMACIST implies that they know that it is the killer, not the tool used to kill, that needs to be dealt with. It is this semantic sleight of hand that reveals the lies in support of The Cause. No one is talking about removing every single thing that can be used as a weapon in order to make us all safer. Why not? Well, because man's ingenuity at fashioning weapons out of pretty much anything means that we would all be forced back to the stone age.  Even so, no one can put the technology of flint knapping back in the bottle.

It doesn’t seem to have dawned upon them that #DisarmHate in the context of Charlottesville would mean impounding the attacker’s car and forcing him to use ride share services or public transit. But we know that’s now what they’re after. I am yet to see anything from gun controllers asking for the removal of every object that can be used as a weapon — knives, axes, baseball bats, chemicals, gasoline, vehicles, etc. — from someone bent on committing violence. They dissemble because they’re after our guns.

This is also a common and valid criticism of red flag laws from the Second Amendment community. Red flag laws as written and implemented take away only the guns from people accused of being dangerous. If the target of a red flag confiscation is so dangerous that he or she cannot be in possession of a firearm, why are that person’s other potential weapons not taken away?

...snip...

Besides the question of other potential weapons, the other important question to ask about red flag laws is why a person considered dangerous enough to be stripped of his or her firearms be allowed to roam free instead of being involuntarily committed or confined?

While the demanding moms implicitly recognize that it is the person, not the thing that kills, they really don't care. The only important thing is advancing the Cause, by whatever means necessary. That "by any means necessary" philosophy has marred every leftist Cause, because it reveals that they have no other principle than power for themselves.