AR-15 Salesman of the month

Mr. Teeth and the AR: Part I

“Hell yes, we are coming to take your AR-15s!”

…and there it was. 

“Beto” O’Rourke let loose his tirade at the last Democratic presidential debate showing that you cannot only take the boy out of Texas… but if you work hard enough, you can medically extract the Texas out of the boy.

Mr. O’Rourke has actually done a service to the country.  For years our side has argued that expansive restrictions on Second Amendment rights have only one inevitable conclusion: further erosion and, ultimately, nullification of those rights.

The rebuke by supporters of gun control to our concerns has always been the same… condensation and hyperbole.

“We are not coming for your guns!  Stop it with that Alt-Right, Fascist, talking-point nonsense!  We are talking about common sense gun reform… after all…. if it only saves one life… blah, blah, blah.”

We respond with history. 

From Germany, to Armenia, to Australia, to England, registration has always led to confiscation.

“Stop it!  Those were different places in different times.  They are distinguishable!  Do not use historical precedent as a means of countering my arguments.”

So we then turn to logic. 

We point out the logical fallacy that criminals hell-bent on murder is probably not going to be particularly assuaged by a statutory prohibition on a particular weapon.  If Weapon A is not available… they will simply switch to Weapon B.  A law restricting possession will, essentially, only disarm the victims who are law-abiding.

“Monster!  Don’t you dare use logic on me!”

Democratic candidate Joe Biden recently stated that, “We will not let facts get in the way of the truth!”  Arguably, Mr. Biden was trying to state something completely different, but, in his own inartful way, he illuminated a legitimate strain of thinking.

(If you have arrived here from our newsletter, continue reading here…)

Mr. O’Rourke has laid bare their plans.

He has finally articulated that which everyone… on both sides… already knew.

They really do want our guns.

Mr. O’Rourke has specifically identified the dreaded AR-15 as his weapon de jour that the government needs to confiscate.  (He initially referred to his program as a government buy-back… this elegant turn of phrase is especially dissipative.  The government did not “provide” any of us our firearms.  They are, by definition, not proposing a “buy-back”… what they are proposing is a confiscation with arguably some form of compensation.)

Years ago when I was working with my uncle, I casually suggested a program similar to the one that Democratic Candidate Andrew Yang has suggested:  A monthly cash payment from the government… essentially a universal minimum wage.  I suggested that this disbursement would be in lieu of participating in any other government program of subsidy.  He listened to me and told me it would only work if we created a Constitutional Amendment to eliminate all State and Federal programs… then an additional Amendment to create the minimum wage disbursement program.  If income tax and the State and Federal bureaucracy were to remain in place, along with a minimum income… both would become permanent features.

I agree with him.  Government programs do not go away on their own accord… nor does a confiscation regime, and the infrastructure necessary to manage it becomes satiated once the last AR-15 has been devoured.  With the machinery in place, other weapons will fall to the whims of the Chattering Class.

England banned guns… long-guns, initially, because the calcified power structure was terrified that returning citizen warriors from WWII would use their guns to instigate a revolution.  Domestic safety was not a major concern.  Even the most ardent support of State Control in England in 1950 would be shocked to know that the beast they created has now banned the possession of sharp pointy things in what once was the world’s greatest empire.

No, Mr. O’Rourke… we thank you for your honesty.  (Your fellow anti-gunners are far less excited about your candor.)  Still, we can finally have a fully honest discussion.

Our response:  Molon Labe.

Steven Lieberman and Sandy Lieberman are the owners of the Artemis Defense Institute. A tactical training facility headquartered occupied California.   (  Mr. Lieberman is also one of the founding partners in the Law Offices of Lieberman and Taormina LLP.  Their law firm specializes in use of force, and Second Amendment defense and litigation.

Recent Posts

Comments (5)

  • Gary Burger Reply

    I remember growing up Pennsylvania gave the voters a choice between an income tax and a sales tax. Eventually the government adopted both. Any time that you give the government power it desires more. It is like a drug addict. Power has no limit, just a rate of increase that will be tolerated by the masses.

    Beto is not the scary person here. We know where he stands and can avoid him. The scary person is the quiet one who does not reveal the ultimate plan. Eventually the Democrats will seize power and institute their plan. It may happen in 2020, 2024 or further in the future. It will happen. The monster cannot be caged forever.

    09/25/2019 at 08:26
  • Ben Townsend Reply

    i give Beto some credit, at least he has the cajones to finally stated the obvious action on the Democratic ticket. No Guns. 2020 will be monumental with respect to the 2nd Amendment as the Democrats have their sights on target.

    09/25/2019 at 16:01
  • Olaf Reply

    Great article!

    09/25/2019 at 17:01
  • Pete Escallier Reply

    Steven, the information you. Give us in your articles always include things I didn’t know but should about the gun debate. Your elegant writing style makes it enjoyable to read, and sometimes I learn new words like “dissipative”. I also love the moniker you use like “the chattering class”, which is a wonderful reference to that group.
    Thanks for taking the time to share these important ideas and issues.

    09/26/2019 at 12:38
  • Pete Escallier Reply

    This week a female police officer was testifying in some committee in Washington that was pushing for an “assault weapons ban”. The article about her showed how she stated “I will not comply” with this ban if it becomes law. I’d like to see a grassroots group of gun owners called the “high grounders”, who define themselves as those who will be armed and occupying the high ground if any form of gun confiscation is tried maybe the image of millions of Americans who are willing to fight and die to protect their constitutional rights. And the potential of police to not enforce those laws by not attacking Americans, but even join them would shake them into learning how deeply we care.

    09/26/2019 at 12:50

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *