Knowing that forced disarmament is predictably a first step toward subjugation, Americans have usually responded to such attempts with the resolve of the Texans at the Battle of Gonzales. When told by General Santa Ana to surrender their cannon and guns, they replied: "Come and take it."
Nevertheless, since the early 1900s, some liberals have been eager to end the Second Amendment altogether. Today, knowing they cannot pursue this goal head-on without Americans rejecting their real agenda, most liberals content themselves by trimming around the edges of the Second Amendment, fiddling with the lengths of barrels, capacities of magazines, open and concealed carry, and more, to inch toward their true goal: the practical elimination of the Second Amendment.
But lately, the mask has slipped. Witness Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens' recent opinion piece in the New York Times, titled "Repeal the Second Amendment."[1] He admits that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms after all -- something some liberals have denied for decades, and that Justice Stevens tried to write out of the Constitution in his dissent in Heller -- so he concludes we should just get rid of it.
Coastal elites who have never been to shooting ranges consider even responsible firearm ownership akin to tracking manure onto the kitchen floor: perhaps not criminal, but certainly not acceptable, and worth stopping.
This makes them especially susceptible to biased reporting that casts legal firearm enthusiasts like NRA members as villains. In fact, most of NRA members are model citizens. Concealed-carry permit holders commit crime at lower rates[2] than the general population, the vast majority of crimes involving guns are committed with illegally obtained[3] weapons, and most mass shootings tragically
