No wonder they crave power

 Have we heard enough of Michelle Lujan Grisham and her totalitarian edict banning the carrying of guns from Bernalillo County and Albuquerque?  I don't think so.  For one thing, the lawsuits filed against her misuse of her office cost a great deal of money, money you and I contribute to organizations such as Gun Owners of America, the Citizen's Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and state level organizations such as Grass Roots North Carolina. Name me another "right" we have that requires one to constantly sue people to be able to exercise it? Oh, that's right, more and more people are having to sue to exercise their First Amendment rights, but that is because the Second is under so much attack.

Thus it seemed prudent to highlight D. Parker's article at the American Thinker today entitled There's no way gun confiscation can work. At least there is no way it can work as advertised, to prevent crime. But that is not the intent, is it? The Second Amendment has been called by St. George Tucker in his Blackstone's Commentaries the true palladium of liberty. In other words, it protects all the other rights in the Bill of Rights. At the time of the founding, this was radical stuff!

There was a key moment in the pushing of the Overton window in the "temporary" New Mexico gun ban, where the governor and would-be tyrant stated that she doesn't expect criminals to follow the order. In the sane world of 10–20 years ago, that would have been the top story everywhere and the critical point where her political career ended.

Because if the efforts of the fascist far left and the ghouls of the gun-grabbing lobby aren't directed at the actions of criminals, then you have the right to ask: what is the point of their constant obsession with controlling and eliminating our commonsense civil rights?

We know why they don't care about criminals and just focus on disarming the innocent. They will lie on occasion, saying they have concerns about criminals stealing guns from citizens, as justification for their obsession with gun confiscation. That makes about as much sense as banning cars to stop drunk driving. But we do know they have a soft spot for the lawbreaker set, as proven by policies on cash bail.

...snip...

It's a hallmark of every leftist authoritarian down through history, from Lenin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, and Maduro to Obama (Biden), to confiscate guns from his political enemies before annihilating them.

Always remember the sequence: registration, confiscation, annihilation.

You should also take notice that in all those studies by the "leading experts" comparing President Trump to Hitler, these "experts" strangely seem to always leave out this major difference. Doesn't this disprove their expertise?

So, we know one thing they see as a benefit to gun confiscation is to reduce the average Joe to serf status. The Democrats don't really like democracy, and would sooner be in power permanently. Rigging elections is such a waste of time and money, donncha know? But there are other benefits as well, which Parker goes on to explore.

But it gets worse than that — much worse. Anti-liberty leftists always love to play a little game where they characterize legislation under consideration as the greatest thing since sliced bread. (Remember the accolades for the BSCA Bipartisan Safer Communities Act when it was passed?) The bill under consideration will always be the solution to all of our problems just before it's passed, and then suddenly it'll be relegated to being "just a first step" right after. The next measure that comes up will be given the same treatment. Lather, rinse, repeat until our individual liberties are no more.

In the current example, if this is allowed to stand, the gun-grabbing ghouls will then demand formalizing the lists illegally created by the ATF (Rule of Law? what Rule of Law?) and put in place a gun registration system based on a couple of flimsy excuses.

They've also inverted the presumption of innocence. The new presumption under this rule is that if you happen to fall under the vague "guidance" of who is a "dealer," you could be charged as a felon if you do not possess a Federal Firearms License. This isn't the only recent case where this inversion has taken place, and it won't be the last.

The new rule will also impact gun shows in that persons who rent tables will be presumed to be gun dealers. The far left hates gun shows because they're a gathering point for its political opposition. If leftists can reduce or eliminate gun shows, it will boost their fortunes as a result.

But even worse than this, if they can control private property by eliminating private sales, they can exploit that precedent to control other products they deem verboten — gas stoves, air conditioners, whatever. All of this is from one little change in an ATF rule. This is why the ghouls of the gun-grabber lobby obsess over these things. They crave power, and they will take it any way they can.

Gentle readers can read the rest of Parker's article. When you think about it, what Grisham has attempted is breathtaking in its destruction of the rughts of American citizens. For without rights, rights given to us by God, or Creator, and which no one has a right to take away, we are reduced to serfs, little more than property of the state. If we are mere property of the state, the state can do with us as our would be rulers please. No wonder they crave power.