When an opinion piece at Common Dreams.org offering solutions to so-called “gun violence” cites how other countries regulate firearms, it reveals the author(s) must have skipped high school Civics because the United States isn’t like those other countries for one important reason: The Second Amendment.
The article in question headlined “What the US Can Learn From Other Nations About Tackling Our Gun Violence Crisis,” refers, via a link, to the Democrat party platform and to data from the Gun Violence Archive, making everything else in the article suspect.
That it appeared right before the Democratic Party convenes in Chicago might essentially dismiss the whole thing as camo-speak, except for one very important point: This is how Democrats still think about guns and the right to keep and bear arms. Throughout the 843-word piece, one increasingly is impressed that the tenor leans left.
Authors Frances Moore Lappé and Hannah Stokes-Ramos point to Canada as one example to follow. It seems a great idea to them that there is a “ban on civilian ownership of automatic weapons.” They like how Canada regulates handguns by requiring a permit, limiting ownership to gun club members and gun collectors and “anyone demonstrating a need or self-defense purposes.”
Evidently, the authors overlooked the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen ruling, which nullified the “needs” requirement as a violation of the Second Amendment. Likewise, the right to keep and bear arms is hardly restricted to gun club members.
Next, the authors take us to Finland, where gun ownership requires a license and registration, an aptitude test for the license and a minimum age of 20. And, guns “can only be carried for a specific purpose.”
Well, let’s see now. An aptitude test. Isn’t that the equivalent of a literacy test, which was ruled unconstitutional years ago by the Supreme Court?
Because the right to bear arms doesn’t require citizens to provide any reason, much less a “specific purpose,” this suggestion once again runs smack into the Second Amendment.
Then we jump to Norway, where semiautomatic weapons are banned, one needs a license from police “s well as a ‘valid’ reason for obtaining it,” and “self-defense isn’t considered a valid reason.” Oops, again. Bruen, McDonald and Heller—all rulings by the Supreme Court in this century—sort of put the kibosh on the Norwegian approach.
Finally, the authors come to what amounts to a sales pitch for Democrats.
“Since the solution to gun violence goes well beyond addressing mental health,” they write, “let’s begin with the most basic gun reforms advocated by the Democratic Party: strengthening background checks and keeping guns out of the hands of those with a history of violent crime or posing a danger to themselves or others, such as domestic abusers.
“Our upcoming national election offers a great opportunity to highlight these crucial steps for public safety,” they observe, “as the Democratic candidate for vice-president°—Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz—became a gun-control advocate in response to the 2018 Parkland high-school shooting.”
And then they offer a plea for “commonsense gun reforms.” Gun rights activists counter this alarm-bell phrase by noting these are gun controls, not ‘reforms,” and when it comes to “commonsense,” they don’t make any sense at all because they target law-abiding citizens, while criminals continue to ignore the law.
Common Dreams describes itself as a group “powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place.”
For citizens to be informed and engaged should require a full perspective, which includes being advised about the constitutional problems related to any policy suggestions.
But according to Fox News, Democrats can’t even get their own platform text straight.
“The official platform of the Democrat Party was released Saturday and makes several references to a ‘second Biden term’ despite President Biden dropping out of the race a month ago,” the network reported. “On Monday night, the party will vote on the platform that makes 19 references to a second Biden term.”
In one paragraph quoted by Fox, the platform asserts, “In President Biden’s second term, he will continue selecting judges who will protect fundamental rights and who represent the diversity of the American experience.”
Except that the judges selected by Joe Biden haven’t seemed all that keen on protecting the fundamental rights secured by the Second Amendment. If Kamala Harris follows him into the Oval Office, and Democrats retain control of the Senate, many pundits suggest America can expect more of the same.
About Dave Workman
What the U.S. can learn from other nations about gun violence?
Maintain the Second Amendment as is, with the original intentions of the Framers who had more common sense through experience than all the Marxists who have ever lived. Bottom line in the Communist Manifesto: (my abridged version): The Marxists want us all dead. If you want to see gun violence escalate, give up your guns and the Marxists will initiate gun violence against us Americans.
Proposed revision: The Marxists want us all in line (bread and political), and will want us all dead if all their “persuasions” fail.
You will own nothing, you will think nothing, you will speak nothing and you will be happy. That is their proposal.
Marxism is a tactic, NOT a philosophy.
Say Democrats…if your going to keep guns out of the hands of violent criminals, once they are arrested they need to be charged, prosecuted and sentenced to the max to keep them off the streets. That’s how you keep them from getting theirvhands on guns
Be sure that once they make bail or are released with no bail, within 24 hrs they will have another gun. It’s why they are violent criminals, they don’t obey the law.
But that attacks their self-image.
question for common dreams, name one country in the world where criminals cannot get their hands on any type of weapon they want? let me know how much you want to wager that criminals in canada, finland or norway possess illegal weapons including firearms, i will cover that bet. the only thing you and your ilk want to do is unarm the general populace (enslave them) so you can terrorize them. reality is, free people need weapons to maintain their freedom, history has told us this over and over. the utopian world you dream of doesn’t exist and never will.… Read more »
It still amazes me that Sweden, at one time (are they still a leader?) led in criminal grenade attacks! So yeah, criminals gonna criminal, and all gun control does is hamper the law-abiding, peace-loving person in protecting their life and property.
I know absolutely that many people in Canada have firearms hat are”illegal”, or more accurately “illegally possessed”. Tha should not be… heir possession of them should be lawful and normal. But Trudaux ,Pére et Fils have seen to that.
Like us, they have a porous border. Folks with intent can import what they want at will.
Nah, they’ve just had lots of ‘my canoe flipped over and I lost all my guns’ accidents over the years…
When they start by schooling you about remedies for violence and they never mention punishment, you should know that they not only are abysmally ignorant about firearms, they come from an immature background, unaccustomed to the realities of life. These ivory tower types have too much reign in our culture.
I would highly suggest that people would find these other countries so attractive move there.
Canucks dropped over a BILLION dollars on their registration system, which solved exactly ZERO crimes.
They HAVE finally wised up, and have given up on it. Well, except for the ‘French’ areas. They seem to be a special kind of stupid.
More recently, they’ve decided since Alberta led the charge of the “middle finger Provinces,” against Turdgo, and that a ‘buy back’ program might not exactly be an easy sell, plus could potentially cause some people to assume room temperature, that THAT might not be too hot of an idea, either.
Right. When I was senior/national editor at the old Fishing & Hunting News, I reported on that financial debacle. It was a train wreck, and of course, the Canadian government would never admit it was a train wreck.
Thanks for reading and sharing this AMMOLAND report.
it’s crystal clear that the racist Democrat death cult and their ideology are clear and present dangers to the United States.
Thank you, Dave Workman, especially for the reminder about “literacy tests” and their unconstitutionality.
If a literal handful of gang members were actually locked away for good, the so called “gun violence” would drop dramatically. It’s not a gun problem, it’s a criminality problem.
One demographic owns “gun violence”, a term that is asinine to begin with.
Typical ignorant gun banning liberals. Their stupidity knows no limits.
Isn’t it ‘interesting’ that regardless of the ‘type’ of violence the ‘solutions’ proposed by the lefties seem to ALWAYS ignore (intentionally?) the common denominator? That would be the person engaging in the violence no matter what ‘tool’ they use. I certainly have no reasonable tactic to wake them up to face that reality. Well short of them actually becoming a victim of violence – that ‘might’ wake some of the up IF they survive that encounter. Nah, who am I kidding, if that ‘violence’ was due to the criminal using a gun most of them would be screeching for even… Read more »
I’ve never ever heard any gun grabber explain exactly what “strengthen background checks” means. Are they just going to background check even harder like Michael Scott? What is a supposedly “stronger” background check supposed to do that the current system isn’t now?
And let us not forget, background checks were originally a compromise in exchange for not being required for private sales. And now, they’re trying to require them for private sales. If they want to renege on their end (not requiring for private sales), then they should just repeal the entire Brady bill.
You’re trying to argue law, the Constitution with people who believe in neither. Plus you’re trying to find logic in a group which, except for Soros and the like at the top, are all overgrown children, full of emotion, and zero logic.
Futile. Don’t give yourself a migraine.
Repeal NFA and GCA, since the Left has reneged on both.
Common-sense gun law: use a gun to commit pre-meditated murder or kill/injure someone with a gun during the commission of a robbery or hostage-taking, automatically receive the death penalty upon conviction. The only way to lessen “gun violence” is not to eliminate possession of guns by law-abiding citizens but, rather, to increase penalties for their criminal use and hope that deters all but the most stupid out there, (who will be the ones swinging from ropes and demonstrating that such shit will no longer be tolerated).
We used to hang horse thieves… Imagine if we hung car thieves…
Nick – remember Dontray Mills (IIRC that was his name) who along with a couple of accomplices stole a bunch of guns which they sold across state lines to other criminals. He ended up with some degree of probation from a sympathetic judge.
Not only the guns were stolen – TWO collectible Norton motorcycles – not sure what happened to those – since motorcycles are analogous to horses, yep hanging would have eliminated his thieving.
To be ‘fair’ I don’t know what happened to him later on but I doubt he is travelling a straight and narrow path.
I don’t remember the name, no.
I read the platform of the once-democratic party. It is rife with errors harkening back to pre-coup Biden as the candidate. For those of you who do not want to slog through page after page of spurious double-speak and Newspeak let me summarize that platform in an acronym: ISIS; I equals infanticide S equals sodomy I equals inflation S equals suicide ISIS is a formula for national suicide well tested over history. The historic books of the Bible, Greek, Roman New World and Persian history all point to this formula as a formula for national suicide. When infanticide, sodomy and… Read more »
Hmmm Modded again.. for WHAT?
Just cuz– you’re not a leftie..
ol’ tim Walz needs to sit his sorry self down and read the information readily available concerning the history and background of the perp who shot up the Parkland Florida school. His criminal history, legal involvement (and more tellingly he LACK of deeper legal involvement), the plain FACT that the kid was well known for having committed at least three felony level acts, had a court resraining order prohibiting him from enering the campus of that school…. snd my Flrod and Federal law banned from firerams ownership because of his felonious and violen history. I won’t even begin to detail… Read more »
It isn’t just the 2nd Amendment that separates us from other countries. It is the whole Bill of Rights. Looked at in totality, European, in fact, no other country has anything like our freedom, thanks to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Don’t get me wrong, the Second Amendment is very important but we should give thanks that the Founders were perceptive n their long range thinking!
One need only look at Australia! How’s that weapons control working for you all? Good Day.
An Aussie friend of mine has stated many times that the gun laws that they voted in are (I quote him) “The worst mistake we have ever made as a country”.
The problem is that England transferred sovereignty from the British government to the Australian government. The people are subjects. After the American revolution drove the British out, the founders transferred the sovereignty, that the founders siezed, to the people. Washington could have been a king and the other founders could have been the nobility. But the founders gave sovereignty to we the people. We are citizens, and lend sovereignty to our federal and state governments to act on our behalf. That is why our founders got to set up our system of government. Follow on politicians do not have sovereighty… Read more »
I don’t get why this piece was even a written. Arguing the Constitution with people who don’t even believe in it is futile. All you’ll accomplish is giving yourself a migraine.
They don’t believe in the Constitution, nor for that matter natural rights. And this from a site who’s most likely directly DNC run. So again, what’s the point?
I believe that author Workman wrote the piece to warn us of the evil or stupid people that walk among us. I could be wrong.
Doesn’t everyone know Democrats want our guns?… These people are evil, but not stupid. The ones calling the shots are brilliant, or they wouldn’t have succeeded in taking over this once great former republic.
Well, they sure didn’ seem to want that AR rifle the clown on he roof used to try and kill DInald rump. They KNEW he had it, and did
The man on that roof was not one of “us”. He was a brainwashed spook.
Well, Nick, it got your attention, didn’t it?
Seriously, Wild Bill is correct in his assessment. And to answer your question, no, not everyone realizes Democrats want to abolish gun ownership. They just want to treat it as a privilege rather than a constitutionally protected fundamental right.
Way too many gun owners reflexively vote for Democrats because they simply don’t believe “it” will happen here.
There are some good, pro-gun Democrats, and I think they believe they can change some minds.
Thanks for reading and sharing this AMMOLAND report.
Touche, yes, I did read it!
A pro gun Democrat? Honestly I don’t think I’ve met one, but, I’m from the People’s Republic of Tampon Tim, so… we got a strange breed of Democrat here, stranger than most.
@frogdog – I think when Dave wrote of “good democrats” he was referring to voters. If we treat them as bad and irredeemable, we’ll never convince them to vote intelligently. Many of those voters either do not prioritize our gun rights or they do not recognize the existential threat posed by democrat politicians.
Only by educating those voters can we hope to peacefully prevent calamity. I have yet to be shot at or to shoot at any human being – and I’d like to keep it that way.
Good democtats – voters? I thought he meant dead democrats!!
Oh, silly me … they are still voters!!
Al Franken lost to Norm Coleman years ago. When they realized, Al was I think 170 short, they dug up 200 voters from northern MN timber country… Yes… Dug them up. Some had been underground for 100 YEARS!
The curious thing is the GOP NEVER fought them… I guess the GOP is afraid of zombies…
I took that to be his meaning as well. And again, living in the suburbs of Murderapolis, in Tampon Tim’s hell hole, I’ve never met a pro-gun Democrat, either voter or politician.
I never suggested we be rude, or insulting to them. My point was, Minnesota, had a strange breed of Democrat here. Stranger than most states, I’d argue.
Hey, where are you at in MN?
Near Murderapolis. Why?
Sorry Dave, but there are NO good Demokrats, pro-gun or otherwise. They still vote in lockstep and enable the evil Demokrat Party.
Mr. Workman, good morning. Your reference to the 2A as a “privilege” starts to get closer to the crux of the matter than you might have imagined. If one looks at the history of this country, it becomes evident the old, dead, white guys who set it up after the Revolutionary War needed to sell The Colonies on a centralized government to administer the newly acquired expanded territory of the republic. Tough sell to a rowdy bunch who just fought a nasty war to get away from a centralized government. If you’ve not read it, I highly recommend the book… Read more »
I have read several of Dr. J.J. Ellis’ books including “The Quartet”. I don’t think that they were trying to set up an oligarchy or administer new lands they wanted to pay the republic’s debts and they were going to raise the money by selling the lands. Remember, Spain, England, and France still coveted the thirteen states. Three powerful empires, each with extensive land holdings on our continent. If our new country could not pay the debts that piled up, they would not have been able to get credit the next time they needed to equip and army and navy.… Read more »
“Rights” are God-given and inhere in the individual by reason of birth as a human being. “Privileges” are granted by the State. The Constitution enumerates, it does not grant, pre-existing rights which are not granted by government or the Constitution…
No, nothing is given by imaginary beings. Rights are TAKEN by people. When successive generations stop fighting to keep them, rights are lost.
Err, “succeeding”, not “successive”.
Stupid Founders! Didn’t they ever hear of modern monetary theory? Just print money!!!
Good morning. Thanks for the well-reasoned response. 100% agree the Founders wanted to pay the republic’s debts, most of which debts were owed to certain wealthy individuals who had financed the Revolutionary War, and had a stake in being repaid. My opinion (again, we all know what those are worth) is creating the means of repaying those folks allowed for the creation of an oligarchy, whether or not intended at the time. Hamilton’s ideas for selecting people to run the country were examples of how he would have had the new country resemble the monarchy that had just been defeated.… Read more »