What’s next for the anti-liberty left’s gun confiscation agenda?

Bluntly speaking, their non-solutions will lead to more mass murders, so they are going to be agitating in the future, but that was always part of the plan.

You can easily guess what is going to happen next with the signing of the ‘historic’ BSCA (with a heavy emphasis on the BS) by simply looking at what the anti-liberty left has done in the past.  Since their non-solutions were never meant to work, there will be more mass murders.  This will give them another opportunity to exploit other people’s pain for their political gain.  You must understand that this is a feature, not a bug for the liberticidal left.

Anti-liberty leftists have an oddly different worldview than normal people, especially when it comes to problems and crises they’ve caused.  They see these as just a means to gain power and screw things up so they can rush in, seize more power and screw things up even more in a never-ending cycle of failure.

Therefore they are very particular about their solutions, while they pretend to be open to doing something - anything to supposedly keep people safe.   You’ll notice that their ‘solutions’ are carefully designed to avoid solving the problem while they enhance their power and set up for future power grabs.  Solving the problem is the last thing they want to do because if they inadvertently fix things, they’ve negated their rationale for existence.  We also know where things are going to go from here because they’ve always followed the same script, year after year.

If you’ve ever wondered how the anti-liberty left can make the ‘easy access to guns’ claim with a straight face, we have a simple explanation.

They follow a two-step crisis exploitation process that starts with that assertion during these situations.  It’s their way of making incremental moves towards gun confiscation while they swear up and down that they aren’t incrementally moving towards gun confiscation.

If all the propaganda media and liberticidal left reactions seem like deja vu, it’s because they are always the same.  They start off by making all kinds of demands for a ban on undefined ‘military style’ weapons of war, licensing schemes, or unconstitutional control over private property with ‘expanded’ background checks.

The new wrinkle is unconstitutional Gun Confiscation Orders (GCOs aka ERPOs), their new assault weapon of choice against the Bill of Rights.  All of that should be a red flag to anyone that cherishes the cause of liberty.

The idea is to push the Overton window as far to the authoritarian left as possible.  Making some demands seem ‘reasonable’ by comparison.

Anti-liberty leftists will then call for some sort of ‘compromise’.

As usual, this is just another example of the liberty deniers lying.  A compromise means both sides get something in a deal. This is a ‘compromise’ where we lose more of our freedoms for absolutely nothing in return.  Anti-liberty leftists get to place new restrictions on our sensible civil rights.

They get to virtue signal about it while pretending they are ‘liberal’ and they don’t have to give up anything in return.

As we just witnessed, any ‘compromise’ and anything they get is hailed as historic.  A day in our great representative republic unparalleled for at least 20 minutes or so, then they began moving on to step two.

You really must watch out for the whiplash in this part of the process.  This is where they suddenly decide that more needs to be done and they start downplaying the formally ‘historic’ achievement they touted mere moments ago.  This step will have some timeline variations, but the important aspect is that when the next attack takes place, they can play the game all over again.

After the anti-liberty left has successfully diminished the latest surrender deal, they reset things back to step one. where any restrictions on liberty are forgotten and they can quickly tee up the ‘easy access to guns' rhetoric once again.

Then with the next mass murder tragedy, they can once again call out for ‘something — anything’ to be done.  Something — anything to solve the problem if that ‘anything’ is exactly what they specify at the moment.  This way, they can never be wrong and they gain more political power each time they screw up.  Is there any wonder why they play this game each time around?

Originally published in the American Thinker