Skip to main content
Report this ad

See also:

Anti-gun fanatics continue to confirm no amount of citizen disarmament enough

After he comes to your house to take your guns, alpha male Lucas Neff is going to work on South Central and East LA.
Photo by Jason Merritt/Getty Images

The firestorm of hatred directed at gun owners following an evil misfit’s stabbing/shooting/car ramming spree in Isla Vista confirms this column’s observation that no amount of “gun control,” short of a total ban, will ever be enough for citizen disarmament proponents.

That’s because California is top-rated by “gun control” groups, and Santa Barbara County public areas are effectively “gun-free zones” due to Sheriff Bill Brown’s commitment to restrict and rescind concealed carry permits (after conning NRA into giving him an “A” grade and endorsing him to their members). There’s literally no place left for the gun-grabbers to go.

But don’t take my word for it.

“You say gun control doesn't work? Fine. Let's ban guns altogether,” Scott Martelle wrote yesterday in an opinion piece for The Los Angeles Times.

“Hunters could own shotguns (and rifles where state laws allow them for hunting), but they would have to be registered and the owners would have to pass a gun safety course before they could get a hunting license,” Martelle generously offers. “Ammunition sales would be tracked much like we do sales of pseudoephinedrine (an ingredient in meth).”

Well why not? Guns have already been compared to porn, so why not toss in the drug analogy, just to make them double-icky?

“As for handguns, assault-style weapons, etc., let’s have a flat-out ban,” he idiotically proposes (it's pretty funny that his Twitter handle is "Smartelle"). The rationale he goes into is hardly important. He’s told us what he and those behind the “common sense gun safety laws / nobody wants to take your guns, you paranoid nuts” lie really want. Of course they want to take them. Martelle just told us. And anyone paying attention knows the Fourth Estate Fifth Columnists at The Times have been after them for years.

And it’s hardly like that should be a surprise.

It’s not like the MILMs didn’t let their outrage show with trademark howls when their demands to prohibit legal gun sales weren’t met with obedience. And it’s not like Martelle’s dream edict wasn’t stated as the end goal from the outset, with Nelson “Pete” Shields, the founder of what would become the Brady Campaign, revealing that while they intended to work up to it in increments, “The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition-except for the military, police, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors-totally illegal."

What can someone who believes in the right to keep and bear arms possibly add to such a “national conversation on guns,” except possibly “No”? That and “Your move” as the most moderate of possible two-word answers...?

An attempt at disarming you may come sooner than anyone realized was likely if a television actor has his way. At first, I resisted the suggestion from WarOnGuns Correspondent JM to link to the disturbed ravings of Lucas Neff, because I suspected it might primarily be a PR move to get his name and fame spread around (his Twitter ID is @RealLucasNeff, in case you were agonizing that there might be counterfeits out there), and also because it’s possible that personal emotional issues may be unraveling here. But the guy’s Twitter meltdown is just so typical of the type of psyche that shrieks indignantly against gun ownership that I figured the illustrative potential merits at least the same glance you'd give some screaming street person, if only to avoid him.

“On the record... F*** THE SECOND AMENDMENT,” he shouts in one tweet.

“I will be happy to come down and personally take your guns,” he promises in another. “Unarmed. With a ton of video cameras. Let's see your alpha bravery in person.”

There’s no shortage of takers, but it appears he’s committed to writing a check he has no intention of allowing anyone to cash.

When people reply that they will respond with force appropriate for some unknown wacky lawbreaker threatening to physically deprive them of their lawfully-owned property (guns, incidentally, that a stranger and thief could then use against them or others), he resorts first to playing victim (“Yo dudes with guns threatening to kill me”) and then to martyr (“If some dude kills me with a gun, at least I'll die proving that dudes with guns kill people.”)

There are plenty of neighborhoods right in LA where he could prove that brilliant thesis, and he wouldn’t even have to threaten to initiate aggression against “dudes” who have peaceably jumped through all the hoops to legally own guns in the state rated tops by the Brady Campaign. There are plenty of street gangs and drug trafficking organizations that would be equally happy to accommodate some suicidal braggart who tells the world he’s interested in personally testing alpha bravery. That might even earn some 13-year-old initiate full membership. Perhaps after he takes your guns, Neff will get right to work on South Central or East LA.

At some point, even Neff must realize he’s being ridiculous and juvenile, because he then tries to inject a bit of (ignorant) legal philosophy into the mix, as if he merits adult conversation, as opposed to repulsion. Perhaps he's just doing it to elicit support from anyone who thinks he’s more than a lottery-winning stage prop.

“Ergo the context of 2nd Am when written is different than how it exists today and an appeal for its redaction/repeal wholly justified,” he declares with scholarly authority, just like he knows what he's talking about. No, why tell him? He knows everything.

It kind of confirms that up-front observation though, doesn’t it...?

Still, as long as we’re now talking law instead of just some deranged stranger showing up and demanding your guns like a foul-mouthed little crazy man, perhaps he ought to know that if he tries that in California, he’ll be breaking all kinds of state laws on transferring firearms without background checks, waiting periods, tansporting firearms and the like, and if he goes out of state and it’s not done through FFLs ... nahh. Why bother? It’s not like he’s actually going to do anything besides rage against self-defense like a whiny anti-gun male...

Say, here's an idea: Angelina Jolie was in town the other day for the "Maleficent" premiere at the El Capitan. Perhaps bold Mr. Neff could try to take her guns away. Unarmed. With a ton of video cameras. Talk about a career boost!

That's about the only thing the silly, inconsequential and obnoxious hoplophobe could do that I'd actually pay to see.


If you're a regular Gun Rights Examiner reader and believe it provides news and perspectives you won't find in the mainstream press, please subscribe to this column and help spread the word by sharing links, promoting it on social media like Facebook (David Codrea) and Twitter (@dcodrea), and telling your like-minded friends about it. And for more commentary, be sure to visit "The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance."


Isn’t it a little early to be talking about the 2014 elections? Not if you want to win. My latest GUNS Magazine "Rights Watch" column is online, and you can read it well before the issue hits the stands. Click here to read "Get Out The Vote -- Especially Your Own!

Report this ad