Pro Tip: Conservatives Shouldn’t Use Anti-Gun Talking Points to Own the Libs

In a segment about armed LGBT people (particularly transgender people) in New Hampshire, Tucker Carlson pulled out some well-worn talking points we’re used to seeing here at The Truth About Guns. While everybody clearly has a right to their opinions about any topic, including the media and LGBT people, it’s never a good idea for someone who supports gun rights, as Carlson does, to use anti-gunners’ arguments to score a few cheap points against your ideological opponents.

The segment, was aimed at highlighting taxpayer-supported National Public Radio’s strange new respect for civilian gun ownership. This is the same NPR that has been on the side of gun control and civilian disarmament for decades. It seems they’re totally down with civilians owning firearms — even “assault rifles” — just as long as those people are members of a favored group.

TTAG highlighted this New Hampshire Public Radio story in our quote of the day when it aired back in February. You can listen to it here.

The financiers and heads of gun control groups, as well as the media, aren’t fans of an armed populace. They think the average individual has no need of firearms and should instead outsource their personal defense to civil servants and the military. And they should be forced to do so by law. They give short shrift to those who live in dangerous neighborhoods and are vulnerable to crime, as well as those who may be targeted based in their race, religion or other factors.

The Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex pushes for laws that would disarm them, no matter how legitimate their need for armed self-defense may be. They can eat cake.

But, some on the left are starting to question this, as they should. They know that the police can’t be everywhere all the time to protect everyone, and they’re realizing that there are some actual Nazis out there who really do wish to do harm to people who aren’t like them. Some of them are probably Feds, but real or not, they’re showing up armed and making threats.

Facing what appears to be real threats and seeing people like Joe Biden doing next to nothing to protect them has lead to many people on the left to start wising up. Instead of embracing gun control, they’re openly speaking against it and calling for vulnerable people to take prudent measures to protect themselves.

This has actually been going on for years. I’m a good example, but we’ve had a number of other articles here at The Truth About Guns written by others (my friend Piper Smith is a great example).

This is what Carlson was highlighting in his recent segment…a left-leaning, anti-gun media outlet (NPR) highlighting the need for armed self-defense in its reporting. Instead of calling it a win and being happy that support for gun control has eroded to the point that NPR — yes NPR — is airing an arguably pro-gun report, Carlson couldn’t help himself.

He not only used the NPR report to call out the network’s hypocrisy, he went on to employ some really dumb anti-gun arguments to do it.

What’s the limit to this? So, if trans people are in fear for their lives in every region of the country, including New England, which apparently is crawling with Nazis now, why wouldn’t we be arming them as we are, say, Ukraine’s trans army? There are famously trans people in Ukraine’s army. They’re very, very proud of that. So, why stop with AR-15s? I mean, why not F-35s or tanks?

If you’ve spent any time at all arguing against anti-gun morons, you’ll recognize this approach right away. It’s usually followed by, “Do you think the Second Amendment gives you a right to a nuclear bomb?”

They, of course, hope we’ll say, “No! I’m not crazy enough to think Americans should own nuclear weapons! That’s when. they start whittling the list list of “acceptable” firearms civilians should own…and never stop.

Next time someone asks you if you think the average citizen should own nukes, the proper answer is . . .

That’s the only good answer to that question. You’ll surely be accused of being insane, but you were never going to convince that person of anything anyway. Giving any ground in that kind of argument is foolish and a waste of your time.

If the idea of individual nuclear weapon ownership is bothersome to you, keep in mind that the sheer cost of acquisition, never mind the maintenance expense is prohibitive. The only thing the average person might do if they actually acquired a working nuclear weapon is poison themselves with it. Besides, does anyone think laws against owning nukes will stop someone who’s determined from acquiring one?

It will probably horrify those who work at NPR to learn that it’s perfectly legal right now for you to own your own F-35. Or a tank. Many people can afford their own fighter jet, but few can afford to fuel and maintain one. The same goes for tanks. Big, terrifying weapons systems aren’t very affordable, but if you have the cash, you can get one.

But probably the worst thing you could do is resort to using anti-gun arguments against people you disagree with…like Tucker Carlson did. The next time he stands up for the right to keep and bear arms, people are going to come out of the woodwork and play that clip of him ranting about trans people owning F-35s and tanks.

Again, everybody has a right to their opinion on guns, transgender people, whatever. But let’s not weaken support for gun rights and engage in our own hypocrisy just to score cheap political points against others. It’s not worth it in the long run.