The Choice for Freedom is Clear in Georgia’s Runoff Elections

by
posted on November 14, 2020
** When you buy products through the links on our site, we may earn a commission that supports NRA's mission to protect, preserve and defend the Second Amendment. **
25595120775_842c558f54_k.jpg
Gage Skidmore courtesy of Flickr

As both elections for Georgia’s seats in the U.S. Senate head towards runoff elections on January 5, it is important to note where the candidates stand on your rights. Both elections are crucial for the future of the Second Amendment in this country.

In this first of two installments, we’ll break down the race between Sen. David Perdue (R) and Jon Ossoff (D), who both purport to be in support of the Second Amendment, but, in reality, only one of them really is pro-freedom.

Ossoff, who previously lost a 2017 special election for the U.S. House of Representatives, has deceptively said that he will “defend our Second Amendment.” In reality, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

His campaign website explicitly states that he supports a “ban on the sale of semi-automatic rifles (“assault weapons”) and high-capacity magazines to the general public.”

Ossoff’s mislabeling of these commonly owned rifles as “assault weapons” is atrocious, dishonest, and patently inaccurate. The term “assault weapon” is no more than a politically invented term used to demonize commonly owned rifles, and those who own such rifles. That he purports to be a proponent of the Second Amendment is an absolutely egregious claim.

We know that his proposed ban is also unconstitutional. With D.C. v. Heller (2008), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment protects ownership of firearms “in common use at the time” for “lawful purposes like self-defense.” Certainly, these rifles that Ossoff wants to ban meet that standard, but Ossoff says he wants to defend your right to keep and bear arms even as he bans these semi-automatic rifles.

As for the proposed ban on “high-capacity magazines,” this term is another subjective and ambiguous one that politicians like Ossoff use to appease those who oppose your rights. Never mind that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently found a ban on such magazines unconstitutional, Ossoff wants to ban them anyway.

Beyond this, Ossoff is campaigning in support of “universal” background checks, red-flag laws, and many other anti-freedom proposals. It’s clear that he has no honest intention of defending the Second Amendment. He has also been endorsed by Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund, which is one of the many anti-gun projects bankrolled by Michael Bloomberg, a man who certainly detests your rights.

Ossoff’s opponent, Sen. Perdue, is an actual supporter of your right to keep and bear arms. His campaign website says that the “right to bear arms is a freedom enshrined in the Constitution.” Speaking at the 2017 NRA-ILA Leadership Forum, Perdue said, “We have to pass a concealed-carry reciprocity law,” which would allow people to carry their firearms for personal protection with them around this nation. Certainly, it’s clear where he stands.

Perdue also called out Ossoff’s blatant dishonesty regarding the Second Amendment. “This just proves he’ll do or say anything to hide his radical socialist agenda from the people of Georgia,” said Perdue, referring to Ossoff, earlier this year.

While Perdue leads Ossoff in the vote, neither candidate cleared the 50% hurdle required to win the election in Georgia, so a runoff election will be held January 5. Georgians who actually want to defend the Second Amendment, unlike Ossoff, need to make their voices heard at the ballot box.

In a soon-to-come story, America’s 1st Freedom will discuss where the candidates in Georgia’s other U.S. Senate election, between Kelly Loeffler (R) and Raphael Warnock (D), stand on your freedom.

Latest

PLCAA in marble
PLCAA in marble

Cynical Strategies To Subvert The Protection Of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act

Since President George W. Bush signed the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) into law on Oct. 26, 2005, those bent on civilian disarmament have sought to bypass the legislation’s clear commands. In fact, 20 years later, gunmakers were fending off a frivolous nuisance suit from the city of Gary, Ind., filed in 1999, despite the PLCAA and state-analogue legislation.

The New York Times Tries to Explain the Drop in Crime

The New York Times is attempting to explain away the Trump administration's success at lowering crime rates with these explanations.

Winner-Take-All Elections Mark A New Chapter In The Second Amendment

Will a meaningful Second Amendment survive in Virginia? That this is even an open question shows how dramatically one election can reshape a state when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms.

Part 1: How the Mainstream Media Lost Touch With America—The Takeover by the Elites

Why is so much of the mainstream, legacy or corporate media opposed to our right to keep and bear arms? This three-part series attempts to answer these critical questions—understanding, after all, leads to solutions.

President’s Column | NRA Focus On The Vision

I can’t believe it’s been seven months since I was elected NRA president, and I’m already composing my eighth President’s Column. The officers never fully anticipated or appreciated the immense challenges we faced when elected.

Standing Guard | The NRA is Strong

The strength of the NRA is, and has always been, our membership. Without our millions of members, we would not be able to effectively rally behind elections for pro-freedom politicians; just as importantly, if not for our large membership, our representatives in office would not feel the same urgency to listen to us in this constitutional republic.

Interests



Get the best of America's 1st Freedom delivered to your inbox.