Will The Republicans Under Trump Bring About A New And Worse Era Of Firearms Restrictions?

There is no fundamental difference between the Democrat and Republican parties, as the closer one dives into the echelons of power, the more one sees that the two parties are not opposed, but a form of controlled opposition. The Democrats are degenerate and do not attempt to hide their degeneracy, but openly embrace it as a part of their “identity.” The Republican are no less degenerate, but only better hide their problematic ways from immediate public scrutiny, and so are “degenerate-lite.”

In spite of those who say that “Gen Z” is more “realistic” than the Millennials, the opposite seems to be the case, with Gen Z following and increasing in intensity the already existing degeneracy of the Millennials. One of such points which they both generally agree upon is the increased restrictions on firearms to the point of banning them as a general whole, which is a pattern consistent with tyrannical behavior going back to the days of the Ottoman Empire. The confiscation of firearms is almost always a precursor to systematic government oppression in practically all historical examples.

The Democrats and their backers in finance and industry have made clear that they want to take away firearms from the people and impose open socialism. This is blatant for all to see, and is a trend riding with the Millennial and Gen Z people, who are coming to power and taking it from the Boomers and Gen X. At this time, is is very curious that South Carolina Senator Lindsay Graham, who was briefly lauded by the right, is now saying that he want to work with the Democrats to strip firearms from the people and is presenting it as an issue of bi-partisan agreement according to a report:

Sen. Lindsey Graham, the chairman of the powerful Judiciary committee and a close ally of the President’s — told CNN on Wednesday that his committee will hold a hearing on gun control legislation later this month, a rare move in a Republican-controlled chamber.

The hearing is expected to cover the “extreme risk protection” or “red flag” laws that have been passed in some states and that Graham has supported implementing at a federal level.

The hearing is significant for the GOP-led Senate, a chamber where most Republicans — and many Democrats — have little interest in diving into the polarizing issue of gun control. The hearing would also follow the House of Representative’s passage of a pair of bills improving background checks for gun purchases, bills that have not yet been picked up by the Senate.

“I haven’t really looked at the House package, but this is to me the area where we can come together,” he said on Capitol Hill. He added, “We did a lot on NICS Fix,” a proposal that passed as part of a broader spending package last year that gave financial incentives for states and local governments to submit information to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

The hearing will be March 26, Graham said.

The “red flag” law is a bill that would allow federal courts to issue gun restraining orders against potentially dangerous people. Graham worked across the aisle last year with his Democratic colleague Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut on this legislation after the Parkland school shooting but it never became law. The legislation would allow law enforcement officers and family members of a suspicious individual to file a petition with a federal court requesting a protection order that would prohibit that person from purchasing or possessing a firearm. The individual would get a hearing and can protest the order within 72 hours of it being issued. The protection order could then be held in place for up to 180 days and could be renewed if new evidence is presented.

“I think there’s a lot of common ground on enrolling people in the background system who are a danger to themselves or others,” Graham said.

Graham described this concept of red flag protections as “prevention” and said that he has “definitely” spoken with Trump about it.

“Most of these cases have something in common, not all but most: a very disturbed person that people have interacted with before,” he explained. “The Parkland shooting is Exhibit A, the guy did everything except take an ad out in the paper. The FBI got called, local cops got called and nobody did anything. Florida passed red flag law. So what we’re going to do is get people from the country, Arizona has one now and see how they work and see if we can incentivize states to pass legislation to allow police to intervene with family members or police officers are becoming a danger to self or others.”

As a former JAG prosecutor, Graham was quick to add that there will be “plenty of due process” for the person being affected, but called this a positive tool for law enforcement that he views as missing currently in many states.

“We’re trying to drive states to create these laws with certain guidelines to make sure they actually work but to let the states deal with this issue but to incentivize them to do so,” he explained.

Blumenthal, one of the more vocal Democratic voices on gun control, hopes to have Graham sign on as a co-sponsor again, but said that regardless of whether Graham sponsors the bill or not, the fact that he’s open to having a hearing is significant within itself.

“I think his taking this step is profoundly important — not just because it will help advance legislation but it indicates his strong personal sympathy to the idea of a red flag statute,” he told CNN on Wednesday evening.

“I’m deeply hopeful that this hearing will show very dramatically the reasons why a red flag statue saves lives and why it may even have saved the lives of the Parkland students,” Blumenthal said. “We need to continue to show the facts and also why numerous states are adopting red flag statues, including Florida in the wake of Parkland.”

Though Blumenthal doesn’t have quite the cozy relationship with the Trump administration that Graham does, he did say that he has mentioned this red flag legislation before to Vice President Mike Pence when he was on the Senate floor.

The senator said that he was not sure yet who the witnesses would be in the hearing and did not believe they had yet been selected. (source, source)

Neither the Democrats or Republicans are the friends of the people at all. They are both parasitic in their approach and desires. Voting is not going to change the system at all, because if it actually did, it would have already been outlawed. While this is bad enough, all politicians are reflections on some level of their people, as they vote he who best reflects themselves into office. Tyranny, while imposed from the top, derives from the masses as it is they who make decisions which incline to tyrannical behavior that eventually results in a change in the government.

It is not for the prudent man to attempt to change this, as the changes have already been set in place. Rather, it is from him to recognize what has happened and to prepare accordingly. One cannot save a society that does not want to be saved, nor can one stop the will of the masses, be it for good or bad. The American people have consistently demonstrated that they would rather choose to embrace the seven deadly sins than to stand against them, for they would rather have fried chicken and sodomy than forgiveness, mercy, and sacrifice.

This is why there is a push against the guns. Indeed, it would not historically abnormal if not only that such a law were passed, but if following the passage of such that oppression seen never before in the US would begin to be realized, and given the American temperament and the technological developments of the society, in a way that would make Lenin, Mao, and the old world envious, and throughout all of the tyranny there will be the Republicans and Democrats, friends as always, holding hands while dragging the nation over the historical rubicon of the twentieth century once more.