We Are Going to Lose the Second Amendment

In just the last month, there have been three school shootings. More if we extend the timeline back to February to include the one at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida. No one can point to any real regulation short of confiscation that might have stopped the killings, and, besides, we already have comprehensive gun regulations.

And yet, the “gun control” drumbeat is growing louder. We continue to be inundated with news reports featuring sobbing, scared children; stone-faced politicians who intone, “Enough is enough”; social media blitzes designed to capitalize on the still-fresh trauma; and on and on.

All this leads to a very simple, obvious conclusion—one that no doubt will shock and make very uncomfortable most people on the Right: We are going to lose the gun debate, just like we’ve lost so many others.

Why? Because the Left knows precisely how to win these contests.

This entry was posted in Gun Control. Bookmark the permalink.

70 Responses to We Are Going to Lose the Second Amendment

  1. Dav says:

    I call Bullshit. The politicians like living and they won’t get to do that if they end the 2nd Amendment.

    • skybill says:

      10-4!!! Oh there would be a bunch that would roll over, turn belly up and give up their guns…. But Kenny, you read “Absolved” and You Know there is at least one “Phil Gordon” out there as well as “Charlie Kintard!!!” So the Left gets “Their way” then it’s our turn… KO-So-Vo will look like boy scout camp!!

      • warhorse says:

        speaking of “absolved” does anyone know the status of that? last I heard the only full copy got “lost” and they were recreating the missing parts from memory?

        I am ready to shell out my money so Mike’s heirs get some benefit for his work…

  2. Anonymous White Male says:

    “because it (the left) wins over the people first, emotionally and disposition ally.”

    There is nothing about this that is true. The left couldn’t win over anyone that is not already committed to their ideology. Those that use the left to promote their totalitarian agenda also control the mainstream media and the court system. The constant narrative that people want an action to occur is merely so they can point to some visuals and sound bites and say, “We did what the people wanted.” And they can use the courts as they have for over 80 years to overlook the Constitution and focus on obscure laws and precedents that came about for just that purpose.

    • Daveisgreat says:

      The ny safe act disproves your point in one easy law. No voting, just political machination.

      • Anonymous White Male says:

        Oh, really? You talkie’s to me, or the author of the piece? Because it seems like what you are disproving is that the left “wins over the people first, emotionally and disposition ally”. When you write a law that doesn’t even concern itself with attempting to court the feelings of the voter, I think you’re showing your intention to ram your ideology down the throats of the citizenry. Screw the peasants!

  3. Hardnox says:

    The author is full of crap. This would cause a SHTF event like no one has ever even thought of.

  4. paul says:

    If we lose it, they will still have to come collecting. Good luck with that.

  5. Rich in NC says:

    everything about the writer is negative…

    • Chet says:

      Rich is right. The author is just selling a story. It’s all BS. To abolish an Amendment I believe both houses of Congress have to agree on abolishment then the vote goes to the States and 2/3 of the States have to approve of the abolishment. Even with Soros controlling most of the voting machines, I doubt the States will ever vote for dropping the Second Amendment. If they do there will be war. Fed judges will be swept out, politicians from local to fedgov will “feel” the rath. Whole offices of commie lawyers will disappear.

  6. SAM says:

    When you pry my gun from my cold dead hands, please don’t grab it by the barrel as it’s will be very hot. Also don’t trip on the pile of dead bodies surrounding my body, it would be very disrespectful to them, after all they were on your side, and you did send them when you were to much of a coward to do it your self.

  7. bogsidebunny says:

    You debunkers of the future doom of the 2nd can yell scream and deny. But the truth is eventually (within 50 years) it’s gonna happen. I’m a former Marine, cop and current NRA member but I suppress emotional spasms and use critical thinking. The end is coming for most gun ownership even if the 2nd amendment isn’t actually repealed. Liberal states have already made ownership next to impossible and the liberal college education system + the lack of a military draft is creating a growing disengaging from the familiarity with firearms. Then the recent mass shootings in “gun free” zones his adding to the “if we get rid of all guns these killings won’t happen” mentality. Yup the Left is smart, organized and knows how to win. But the shrinking Conservative base is complacent and thinks the America they’ve known will go on forever. Nothing is forever. Whoa, some yell we can win by sheer firepower by using our ARs & AKs to fight the ANTIFA type. That’s a wet dream folks. The current Conservative militants yelling for another civil war are not organized, many have no prior military training and have no basic support structure. Even if a 100,000 take their weapons and run about willy-nilly they’ll will stand no chance against the police and Liberal controlled military. Don’t bother thinking the cops and grunts will come over to your side. Their high-ranking leadership has been compromised and will coerce the troops into toeing the line with threats of dismissal, jail and even firing squad execution. Call me a doomsayer, but don’t bet your pay checks against my predictions. since I’m 76 so I really don’t give a shit any more. The rest of you full of piss & vinegar youngins can fantasize all you want about reliving the glories of Bull Run, Shiloh and Antietam. Big battle Rebel wins but the they still lost the war.

    • B says:

      Tell that to the HUNDREDS of new shooters I have taught in the past 8 years. Hundreds. Multiplied by tens of thousands of folks like me…at gun clubs all across the country.

      East and west coast? Maybe, but they are sheep already. Middle of this great country? Not a chance.

      Civil Wars have started over less.

      • California southpaw says:

        I now have the luxury of going to the range during the week because I just retired. Used to be just older rifle guys but now families are crowding both ends of the weekend. Pistol and rifle ranges. Skeet. All shapes, sizes, colors and sexes. Great to see in my opinion.

    • Chet says:

      I am in my 70’s and I don’t agree with you. Just the idea the there is no leadership is what can help our side win. Groups will develop as time goes by. This war won’t be anything like you see in the movies. And the Rebel groups who did some of the most damage to the North and lived to tell about it were small bands that rode north into undefended towns where they disrupted commerce, tore up rail lines and robbed banks. The same thing we can start doing now. We should all know who the commies are within our 5 mile AO. Start taking them out. Quietly. If 100,000 Patriots each took out 5, that is half a million fedgov workers, banksters, lawyers and politicians who used to be commies.

    • I would tend to agree with your assessment but only as long as the current state of unlimited government spending continues as well.

      The old saying that you cannot fight city hall is true but only if city hall has unlimited resources which our current out of control government has had for decades. It changes everything, more things than can be mentioned here but includes circumstances like having a need for civilian/voter support of laws and regulations before they are enacted, the need for a standing militia or the need to even make regulations financially viable.

      What we have currently is a very artificial environment that directly benefits big government and promotes individual oppression but it cannot be maintained forever. Each step the left makes actually takes us closer to the point of critical mass that will topple the entire thing. Once that happens all bets for big government are off the table. What they have been doing from so called “equal rights” to yes, even gun control is totally non-sustainable in a real world environment and frankly cannot even be achieved with success without unlimited resources to draw on for enforcement. Any government that has ever tried to disarm their population before the invention of a FIAT economy has failed.

      What we have to ask ourselves is can we hold out longer than the money changers can rig the books? Is it even possible for them to sacrifice the productive base to such a point and continue to support the monster they created? At what point does putting square pegs in round holes and oppressing the productive class of a society reduce that society to ruin?

      From what I see the tide is already ebbing no matter how stupid the leftist continue to be in their enclaves the edges have been receding for a few years now.

    • Sammy says:

      So says the consumer…

  8. Sigproshooter says:

    No without a constitutional convention we won’t. That would be a long,loud road that would get everyone involved. We are a very long way from that.

    • Richard Watson says:

      “Not without a constitutional convention we won’t”.

      Disagree. The SCOTUS has usurped so much power, if five of nine lawyers in black robes decide that only militia members (as they decide to define militia members) are covered under the Second Amendment they will make that the law of the land. And if you don’t think there are four seated on that bench already, you haven’t been paying attention.

      Enforcement however, is a horse of a different color. (or is it a horse from a different barnyard?)

      I forget which president said to the SCOTUS “You made the decision, now go enforce it yourself”.

      • Nemo says:

        Richard, That would be President Andrew Jackson

        “The Supreme Court has made its decision, now let them enforce it.”

    • Bob M says:


  9. DTG says:

    Hysterics…pure hysterics. The author doesn’t even address what is required to rescind an amendment. Further, as the original Bill of Rights was necessary to be added to the Constitution for ratification, the BoR became part and parcel of the original deal. It can’t be rescinded without scrapping the entire thing. The author might have discussed with a constitutional attorney or two before spewing this.

    Secondly, the 2nd Amendment grants nothing to individual Americans; it simply restricts government intrusion on a pre-existing right.

    Thirdly, the Constitution cuts both ways: If certain entities don’t obey the Constitution in the execution of their duties, John and Jane American Citizen are under no obligation to obey, either. This is known.

  10. Mike G. says:

    Reading that was a waste of time. A thumb-sucking article written by a fricking law student-wannabe who’s got designs on joining Conservatism, Inc.


    Bullshit. We will not lose the Second Amendment. For, among many others, the reason cited by Admiral Yamamoto.

  11. QP says:

    In this day and age, the Second Amendment doesn’t protect the right to bear arms; the fucking guns do.

  12. M says:

    I agree with Sigproshooter 100%.
    And any stop-gap attempts to legislate gun control will have to go through Trump. Trump has not shown or stated any indication that he was for historical gun control measures such as Di-Fi’s AR ban.

    • Wirecutter says:

      No, just bump stocks which was one step too far.

      • EmVe says:

        The public comment period on the bump-stock ban proposal expires on June 27. Gun-control advocates vowed to weigh in. Of the more than 17,000 public comments received so far by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), a review by Reuters of 4,200 turned up only 10 favoring the bump stock ban. Almost all the rest criticized the proposal as heavy-handed, unnecessary or unconstitutional.
        TEN. Just 10.

        Oppose the ATF’s Proposed Rule on the “Bump-Stock Type Device”
        [Docket No. 2017R–22; AG Order No. 4132– 2018]. Cut the following (taken from GunOwners.Org) and paste it at the following link:


        I am opposed to any regulation on bump stocks.

        These proposed regulations would declare a “bump stock” to be a machinegun because it allows the gun to fire more than one shot “by a single PULL of the trigger” — that is, by a single volitional function of the finger.

        But federal law, at 26 U.S.C. 5845(b), defines a part as a “machinegun” ONLY if it is designed solely and exclusively to allow the gun to “fire more than one shot … by a single FUNCTION of the trigger.”

        To state the obvious, a finger is not the same thing as a trigger. And, while a bump stock is in operation, the trigger functions separately every time a round is discharged.

        So these regulations are proposing a radical change — as they effectively define a gun as a machinegun even if the trigger resets for every round that is fired, so long as the finger only pulls the trigger once.

        While bump stock devices will now be treated as machineguns under these regulations, they also raise serious questions in regard to AR-15s and other semi-automatic rifles — as they are now on the brink of being designated as machineguns by the next anti-gun administration.

        In the past, one had to fundamentally change the firing mechanism of a semi-automatic firearm to convert it into a fully automatic firearm.

        But now according to these regulations, a bump stock is a machinegun — and it can “readily restore” a semi-auto into a machinegun, simply because the gun owner can effectively fire the weapon continuously with a “single pull” of the trigger. This would invoke the statutory definition for a rifle, which is classified as a machinegun (26 USC 5845(b)).

        It won’t matter that a gun which is being bump fired has not been fundamentally altered. AR-15s will be on the brink of extinction once these regulations go into force.

        These regulations dismiss Second Amendment protections, by appealing to the Heller court decision. But the Constitution trumps the Supreme Court — so when the Second Amendment says that the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed,” any limitation of the right for law-abiding citizens should be treated as unconstitutional.

  13. grayjohn says:

    Then a lot of Leftists are going to lose their lives.

  14. Rick F says:

    I would disagree sig, one example: the 1st “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    Doesn’t congress pass a law giving tax free status to a religious org..I’ve seen educators, congressman and supreme court justices use the “N” word.. Who the Hell doesn’t know what that means? yet we still can’t say it….

    Sad to say I agree with wirecutter, I just don’t know how they’re going to implement it..

  15. Kurt says:

    Mr. Kathawa might want to go change his panties after the thorough wetting he just gave them.

    “Why the Right is so confident that the explicitness of the Second Amendment will prevent it from being undermined and eventually cast aside is a mystery.”

    Because we have the guns? Isn’t that the basis of the Second? So the People are able to resist tyranny?

    I can’t take a college grad (J.D. candidate? Is he looking for work in Lynchburg? Mt. Vernon fellow? Dubya Tee Eff?!?) seriously when their writings are filled with grammar mistakes.

  16. Will says:

    I don’t agree, but even if by some chance a Dem controlled Congress manages to convince enough to get the 2nd pulled, the math of gun confiscators to gun owners is overwhelmingly in the gun owners favor. SurvivalBlog just did a great article walking through the actual math of “door-kickers” to gun owners. I don’t see widespread confiscation ever happening in this country.

  17. NewVegasBadger says:

    The Left frames the debate in terms of emotion, while the Right frames the debate in terms of logic. Emotion will trump logic most of the time. Just like at the ads you see on TV, products are sold terms of feelings/emotional connections rather than in terms of why brand A is better than brand B. Also, this culture is conditioned for the quick fix approach to problem solving. Passing a new law gives the illusion that some thing is being done. It is easier to call for a ban on “assault weapons” than to call for parents to teach their children a sense of morality, ethics and self-control.

  18. Crotchety Old Bastard says:

    Sigpro is correct. And I would add that some Constitutional scholars believe that none of the first 10 amendments can legally be repealed because those amendments were required before several of the States would ratify the Constitution – thus, the States would have to repeal the Constitution to repeal any of those 10 amendments. So what are the chances that two-thirds of the States would let that happen…

    • Richard Watson says:

      Eleven states (two more than was required for ratification) had already approved before the Bill of Rights was introduced.


      On June 8, 1789, James Madison addressed the House of Representatives and introduced a proposed Bill of Rights to the Constitution. More than three months later, Congress would finally agree on a final list of Rights to present to the states.


      And that goes for you too, Sigpro.

      “Richard Watson, I hear what you’re saying, but you sir are simply wrong. For any of the bill of rights to be removed, it requires a constitutional convention. If you spend time reading how our founding documents and how our form of government really works, as in factually correct not hysterical b.s., you will see I and many other are correct.”

  19. Sanders says:

    So, those who don’t have guns and don’t want to have guns are going to take the guns away from everyone who has guns? What am I missing, here?

  20. Joe Dokes says:

    “No one can point to any real regulation short of confiscation that might have stopped the killings”…I call bulls*** on this statement.

    Why do so many government buildings have metal detectors at the entry doors? Why do schools not have this same technology? Why don’t people demand that all schools have metal detectors instead of wanting to take law abiding people’s guns? A regulation requiring metal detectors be installed at all school entrances would most likely prevent most school shootings.

    • Wirecutter says:

      I don’t think a metal detector is going to stop somebody that’s determined to get in. They’ll just shoot the person manning it, step over their bodies and drive on.

      • BlueMntCeltic says:

        Yep, there’s at least a couple of school shootings that started outside the school and proceeded inside (Columbine for one), Sandy Hook, the shooter took out the Secretaries I believe, so metal detectors alone aren’t enough, then, imho, you should have armed individuals in depth with interlocking fields of fire to engage the shooter from multiple sides. There’s more that should be done but that’s for another discussion.

      • fjord says:

        That or someone determined could start picking them off during gym class.
        Or recess.

        If the schools still have that.

      • Anonymous says:

        Or, the would-be shooter could just shoot into the crowd of students waiting to get through the metal detectors. We don’t need more security theater.

  21. Trish says:

    All the more reason to keep buying. Lots and lots of buying. :) And here we still have gun shows where you don’t need background checks.

    • Kevin says:

      “And here we still have gun shows where you don’t need background checks.”

      Where might that be?

  22. 2Dogs (Arkansas) says:

    It doesn’t matter what They think they can “take away”. They didn’t “give” anybody this particular thing anyway; God did. No, I don’t mean He gave us guns (that was Mr. Browning). I mean using efficient tools to protect ourselves and our families from everything from snakes to sub-humans to Tyrants and everything in between. As of now, this continent is densely populated (with some voids) by Men and Women who viscerally understand this Natural Truth.

  23. Elmo says:

    I get the funny feeling that Deion Kathawa actually WANTS the Left to win this argument.

    Maybe he’ll actually learn something about the Constitution while in law school, but I’m not counting on it.

  24. Sigproshooter says:

    Richard Watson, I hear what you’re saying, but you sir are simply wrong. For any of the bill of rights to be removed, it requires a constitutional convention. If you spend time reading how our founding documents and how our form of government really works, as in factually correct not hysterical b.s., you will see I and many other are correct. All Gore invented the internet, the information is available and easy. Have a nice day.

    • Richard Watson says:

      Dear Sig,

      “Richard Watson, I hear what you’re saying, but you sir are simply wrong.”

      What color is the sky in your world where the Fed Gov is constrained by the Constitution?

      Take a look at the Kelo Decision.

      Obamacare mandate decided as a tax, after the administration argued it was not a tax. Never mind the bill originated in the senate, not the house, where any tax bill must originate.

      Et cetera.

      “If you spend time reading how our founding documents and how our form of government really works, as in factually correct not hysterical b.s., you will see I and many other are correct.”

      I’d be happy to discuss the differences between “our founding documents “and how our form of government really works”. Apparently you stopped paying attention long ago.

      Ken knows my e-mail and if you care to continue the discussion, Ken has my permission to give it to you.

      Have a nice day yourself.

    • Chet says:

      What i fear about a CC (Constitutional Convention) is that commies like soros and his ilk will take it over. Mark Levin talks up big for a CC, but I never hear him address how the Patriots will have anything to say once the elite globalists take control of the CC. And you know they will.

      • crazyeighter says:

        Isn’t that what happened at the last Constitutional Convention?

        • Richard Watson says:

          A Convention of States is NOT a Constitutional Convention.

          Article V of the U.S. Constitution gives states the power to call a Convention of States to propose amendments. It takes 34 states to call the convention and 38 to ratify any amendments that are proposed. Our convention would only allow the states to discuss amendments that, “limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, impose fiscal restraints, and place term limits on federal officials.”



  25. C.R. says:

    It will not happen all at once the rights will get whittled away bit by bit the left is in it for the long haul . We have to educate anyone we can about firearms they can be lots of fun , hunting and target shooting , skeet & trap shooting sporting clays and just plinking away at a tin can with a .22 But you have to be aware of safety ! Teach the newbies safety and to follow the rules . We have to be ambassadors not zealots . but we can give no quarter .

  26. Arc says:

    Retired 0311 here, armed to the teeth. No one is taking shit.

  27. James says:

    The 2nd is just a affirmation of a birth right of self defense,as much as I love it and the thought that went into it really doesn’t matter to me either way,will not without a fight(perhaps fatal) live in a country that disregards birth rights.Guns will be a after thought in 50 years,we will though have all sorts of energy weapons/lazers and perhaps even the infamous “Q-37 explosive space modulator”!We will always have weapons of one sort or another no matter what supposed laws say.

  28. Skip says:

    Wore my NRA hat downtown the last few days. Not one dirty look or comment, but a lot of thumbs up or “Like your hat”. A LOT more of us than anyone realizes.

    • Trish says:

      I also believe there are a LOT more of us than anyone realizes. We just don’t spout off like the lefties do. I have no need to prove anything to anyone.. And a thumbs up to you!

  29. Gryphon says:

    The bolshevik ‘left’ doesn’t have to “Win Over” anyone more than the Politicians (((they)) Control (pretty much All of them) and then ‘pass laws’ that the Fence-Sitting Fudds and suburban soccer moms will Support and Obey. That will leave the Rest of Us, and This Time, it will take less than ” 3 Percent” to Disrupt things until the .gov can’t Function.

    Bring It.

  30. John Deaux says:

    This is an endless discussion with outright ban vs come take it crowd. At some point we, as in we right leaning citizens, have to come to the reality that we are loosing this war, we win a battle occasionally and make ourselves feel better, and have to get serious about winning.
    Yes we have to stay on alert and keep our elected official’s feet to the fire but we also have to do our part in pushing the good aspects of firearms,we need to introduce non shooters to the fun of shooting and benefits of ownership .
    Communists have positioned themselves in the positions to influence our children, control our entertainment and change our language, what are we doing ? Bitching and fast typing doesn’t count. Get a copy of their bible, Rules for Radicals, , read it, read it again, commit it to memory! Us it against them when they try to apply it into a situation, make them pay dearly
    Fight fire with fire, take no prisoners and walk over their bodies with no regrets
    No Compromise, No Surrender
    Absolutely None

  31. MadMarlin says:

    Blah blah blah…. still boils down to come and take it fuckers!

If your comment 'disappears', don't trip - it went to my trash folder and I will restore it when I moderate.