How many times have you heard or read this: “If people shouldn’t need photo ID to vote, why should it be required to buy a gun?”

Too many left-tilting reporters and politicians quickly dismiss this question as redneck rhetoric, but don’t let them get away with such dismissive condescension. It is a legitimate question because we’re not talking about guns, we’re talking about rights and all constitutionally protected rights are equal, especially the ones enumerated in the federal and state constitutions.

So, you bet this is a question politicians should answer and not with some song-and-dance response that doesn’t really answer your inquiry. Don’t let them get away with it.

Question: If there is a waiting period on gun purchases, why not on other court-recognized rights?

As Joe Biden is fond of saying, “C’mon, man!” Why should a law-abiding citizen have to wait any longer than it takes for a NICS check to be conducted before he/she can walk out of a gun shop with a newly purchased firearm? It’s a serious question deserving of a serious answer. Good luck with that.

The National Instant Check System was created to allow quick exercise of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. When the proposal was initially explained by the people working at Capitol Hill during the first Clinton administration, they put politicians on the spot by noting credit card companies even 30 years ago could verify someone’s credit history, so why can’t the country create a system by which gun dealers can verify a would-be gun buyer’s qualification to purchase a firearm?

The alternative pushed at the time was a national waiting period. The NICS check derailed that idea but it’s back because anti-gunners aren’t concerned about crime so much as they are about inconveniencing law-abiding gun buyers.

Question: If you are required to get a permit before buying a gun, why shouldn’t a permit be required to ________ (fill in the blank)?

No matter how many times one repeats this, it still escapes gun control/prohibition advocates that “a right, is a right, is a right.” It’s not okay to treat one constitutionally protected right one way, and another protected right differently.
Anti-gunners dodge this question with the acrobatic talent of an Olympics-class gymnast.

Radical Rhetoric

(2) PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION — A psychological evaluation is conducted in accordance with this paragraph if —
(A) the evaluation is conducted in compliance with such standards as shall be established by the Attorney General;
(B) the evaluation is conducted by a licensed psychologist approved by the Attorney General;

(C) as deemed necessary by the licensed psychologist involved, the evaluation included a psychological evaluation of other members of the household in which the individual resides; and

(D) as part of the psychological evaluation, the licensed psychologist interviewed any spouse of the individual, any former spouse of the individual, and at least two (2) other persons who are a member of the family of, or an associate of, the individual to further determine the state of the mental, emotional, and relational stability of the individual in relation to firearms.”

Yes, there would be a deafening public uproar. Network news anchors would go for the jugular of the proponent(s). Protests would erupt. The idea would be demonized.

But a right is still a right.

Question: If background checks are required to purchase a firearm, why shouldn’t they be required for ________ (fill in the blank)?

Expect this for an answer: “Well, guns are different?” How so? Remember, we’re not talking about firearms, we’re talking about rights and therein is the dilemma politicians — especially the liberal ones — cannot bring themselves to face. It makes them cringe. Too many of them cling to the notion owning a gun, much less carrying that firearm for personal protection, is a protected right, not a government-regulated privilege.

Keep The Focus

When you confront a politician about the Second Amendment, you’re the one who must make sure the conversation stays on track. “We’re not talking about guns, Senator, we’re talking about rights.”

Expect some politicians to lose their tempers. Others will simply be speechless, and suddenly remember they’ve got a committee meeting. Still others might try to shut you up. It may be the rare one who tells you straight to your face, “You’re right, and I’m doing everything I can to protect those rights. This bill is nonsense.”

However, possibly the most embarrassing question of all is not one you ask of politicians seeking your vote — it’s the question you ask fellow gun owners, the ones who always complain about the way things are.

Are you registered to vote, and did you vote in the last election?

Follow that up quickly with, “Whom did you vote for?”

This correspondent has asked this question at gun shows and the responses have often been mind-numbing.

“I’m not registered to vote. I don’t want my name on a list.”

“I can’t remember who I voted for.” Yeah, right.

If we’re going to combat the stupidity of the gun prohibition mindset, we’ve also got to fight just as energetically against election-losing apathy within our own ranks. Nobody forgets to vote.

It is simply not enough to get angry and unleash your frustration on social media. Telling nobody special on Facebook “He should be impeached!” is just wasted space. It’s an empty observation, easy to write down and “send” but far more difficult to fulfill by voting in an election.

You’ve got to have a plan, a goal and be willing to get off the couch and go for it. Right now in state capitols across the country, legislatures are meeting or preparing to meet. You’ve got all of these politicians in one spot. They should be easy to find. All you need to do is look — and then start asking questions.