WaPo: NYT Hurting Gun Control Cause by Calling for Confiscation on Front Page
On December 5, The Washington Post (WaPo) said a New York Times (NYT) front page editorial calling for gun confiscation is hurting the gun control cause.The NYT editorial is written around President Obama’s ongoing narrative against “weapons of war”–i.e., “assault weapons,” which were two of the four weapons Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik used in their San Bernardino terror attack. It is the first time in nearly a century that the NYT has run an editorial on the front page, and they came out with guns blazing.
According to the NYT, it is “time to end the gun epidemic in America.” And part of doing this means outlawing and confiscating “weapons of war.”
Here’s how The New York Times put it:
It is not necessary to debate the particular wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.Two points:
Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.
- The Second Amendment is there to protect gun rights from government infringement whether by degrees–via regulation–or all at once–via confiscation. And it is there to protect gun rights from government because the source of those rights is God, not man–i.e., the source is God, not man-made government.
- AR-15s sold in retail stores are not “combat rifles.” They are simply semiautomatic rifles on an AR platform, and that platform is extremely popular because of the reliability of the gun and the ease with which one can procure parts and accessories. But the left–and particularly the NYT–constantly demonize and ridicule ARs and similar rifles in hopes of securing a ban on them.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWR Hawkins. Reach him directly at email@example.com.