Late last week, U.S. Rep. Kathleen Rice, D-N.Y., tweeted that the NRA is increasingly becoming a domestic security threat.
Rice’s proclamation does two things: First, it makes her but the latest in a long line of liberal politicians who have decided to attack the NRA instead of dealing with examples of leftist-inspired violence uncovered by the NRA. Secondly, it insults the whole of NRA's membership, as the NRA is not an abstraction but a group of about 5 million-plus freedom-loving Americans who are extremely active in elections and political campaigns.
... it insults the whole of NRA's membership as the NRA is not an abstraction, but a group of about 5 million-plus freedom-loving Americans who are extremely active in elections and political campaigns.As for only being the latest in a long line of liberals who took umbrage with the NRA’s campaign for truth, Rice’s tweet follows comments made by California Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, Women’s March co-chair Tamika Mallory and the Los Angeles Times, among others.
Newsom suggested that the NRA’s focus on the Left’s violence was actually an underhanded incitement to violence against politicians, like himself. Mallory suggested the focus on the Left’s violence was an example of racism and a tacit approval of violence against women. The Times suggested the NRA’s focus on the left’s propensity for violence was delivered with anti-Semitic overtones. (The Times actually based this on some of the architecture that appears in an NRA commercial).
In fact, the Times writer went to great lengths to make his case, writing:
Talk about mental contortionism. The Times must have literally tied itself in knots to find fault with the NRA’s commercial.
But one thing Newsom, Mallory and the Times failed to do was ask if, in fact, the Left in this country has become so unhinged that violence is its trademark.
But one thing Newsom, Mallory and the Times failed to do was ask if, in fact, the Left in this country has become so unhinged that violence is its trademark.Enter Rep. Rice, who does not ask that hard question either. Rather, she attacks the NRA the way Hillary Clinton and Co. attacked Bill Clinton’s myriad female accusers. She completely sidesteps the NRA’s contention that the Left is violent in media and in action, and instead suggests the NRA is becoming a domestic security threat on President Trump’s watch.
This leads to the second problem; namely, that Rice’s accusation is not against an abstract force or theory, but against a civil rights organization that consists of some 5 million members. And to suggest the NRA is a domestic security threat is to suggest that the members who compose the NRA are a threat, as well.
When you think about it this way, Rice’s suggestion is even crazier than it first seems. That's because anyone who has ever roamed the corridors and walkways of an NRA Annual Meeting; has ever browsed the booth upon booth upon booth of guns, ammunition and accessories at that meeting; and has rubbed elbows with the tens of thousands of Americans who attend every year—anyone who has done these things knows the last thing you will find at such a meeting is a domestic security threat.
One is far more likely to find military veterans young and old, families, and citizens of all races and various faiths, united under the banner of freedom.
The Left needs to deal with its propensity for violence instead of pointing the finger at the NRA.AWR Hawkins is the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and host of Bullets with AWR Hawkins, a Breitbart News podcast. He is also the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter at @AWRHawkins, or reach him directly at [email protected].