Seattle Gun Rights Examiner Dave Workman reported Tuesday that there is a growing movement within the bowhunting community to take on a more active role in defending gun rights. The logic behind doing so is solid: there is a great deal of overlap between the anti-gun and anti-hunting fanatics (anti-gun former Obama administration “regulatory czar” Cass Sunstein, for example, wants not only to ban hunting, but to provide animals with a mechanism to file lawsuits against humans).
Hunting is for now more politically correct than self-defense or (gasp!) defense against tyranny, so groups like the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence have made a point to “embrace” hunters, in order to isolate us “insurrectionists.” For the moment, therefore, the anti-Second Amendment politicians who claim to “support the Second Amendment,” generally speak with faux reverence about the honorable tradition of hunting, but (there’s always a “but”) “you don’t need a thirty round magazine (although they often say “clip”) to hunt deer.”
This strategy allows them to keep some shortsighted hunters on the sidelines–or even actively involved in the “gun control” movement–because they don’t care about (and sometimes actively dislike) so-called “assault weapons,” semi-automatic handguns, etc. Hence the pejorative term, “Fudd.” It’s as if it never occurs to these “sportsmen” that as soon as their usefulness ends, it’s their turn to be fed to the crocodile–as if it has never occurred to them that today’s deer rifle is tomorrow’s “intermediate sniper rifle” (and today’s .22 rimfire plinker is the day after tomorrow’s “light sniper rifle”), according to the Violence Policy Center.
That a growing number of hunters–including some who do not even use guns for their sport–are wiser than that, is gratifying. They should be welcomed into the gun rights advocates’ fold, and the alliance must not be a one way street. The many gun rights advocates who do not have any interest in hunting need to see beyond their own self-interest and protect hunting rights with the same energy we use to protect gun rights (or ideally, more energy than that, unfortunately). Things like lead ammunition bans, assisted-opening knife bans, and introduction and protection of predators based on dubious ecological science, need to be fought right alongside the fight to keep AR-15s legal.
Guns, bows and knives are all “arms,” as protected by the Second Amendment, and can all be used to defeat would-be tyrants and their hired muscle. For that reason, they are all on the forcible citizen disarmament jihadists’ target list, and for the same reason, must all be considered necessary to the security of a free state.
- Hunting rifles–the next ‘sniper weapons’
- When gun bans are not enough–the war on . . . pocket knives?
- Obama’s Customs agency declares war on pocket knives
- Cry Wolf
- What do books, wolves and someone thinking I got something right have in common?
- Next big ‘gun rights’ battle may be over knives
- Lead ammo ban sought from EPA threatens gun owners, game agencies, say critics
- ‘Arms’ are not just firearms; knives and the 2A wrap-up GRPC
- Divide and conquer: CSGV’s strategy to disarm us piecemeal
- Keeping and bearing arms applies to knives as well as guns
- WA hunters questioning origins of Teanaway wolves
- Wolf experience on Vancouver Island holds harsh lesson
- What’s up with switchblade knife legislation?
- Washington on leading edge of knife law reform
- Bowhunters joining Second Amendment battle