The Gun-Control Paradox

There are tens of millions of people in the United States who should not be allowed anywhere near any kind of weapon. They should not be allowed for a variety of reasons including, but not limited to, having a mental or moral disease or defect.

These are, unfortunately, the very same people who vote and elect politicians who will, in turn, decide who gets to have firearms and under what circumstances.

In short, people who shouldn’t have firearms or have any say in the matter at all are the ones deciding who should have firearms either via the people they elected or by the initiatives they pass, such as Proposition 63 in California and Initiative I-1639 in the State of Washington.

The Gun-Control Paradox - Charles Nichols in court.
Charles Nichols arguing to overturn California’s Loaded and Unloaded Open Carry bans before a three-judge panel of the 9th circuit court of appeals on February 15, 2018.

Gun-Control and Voting

A logical, but in reality unreachable, partial-solution is to prohibit those persons who should not be allowed anywhere near any kind of a weapon from voting.

But that would require these very same voters to either directly, or through their representatives, pass a law which prohibits them from voting. And then that law would have to be upheld by the judges who were appointed and/or elected by these very same voters and politicians they elected.

These voters turned out en masse in California this election, more so than in the last election two years ago than did the sane and moral voters.

Democrat Supermajorities

Both houses of the California legislature now have supermajorities of Democrat politicians who are as mentally and morally diseased and defective as the people who voted for them.

These next two years will see them pass gun-control laws limited not by their zealousness to do evil but constrained only by their limited intelligence.

These politicians will not limit their attention to firearms.

Throughout history, and regardless of what one calls the form of government, people have generally had the government they wanted.

This has also generally been the government they deserved.
– Charles Nichols –

Charles Nichols is a proponent of open carry.  In 2011, he filed a Federal Civil Rights lawsuit seeking to overturn California’s 1967 ban on openly carrying loaded firearms in public for the purpose of lawful self-defense.  Oral argument in his case took place on February 15, 2018, before a three-judge panel of the 9th circuit court of appeals. Charles follows court cases relating to The Second Amendment and tells us what they really mean instead of what reporters, who have never read the decisions in the cases, say they mean.

Email Subscription

Subscribe to Charles Nichols – NewsBlaze Second Amendment News by Email