Hunter Biden Trial Illustrates Which Side of Gun Debate Has Principles – Bearing Arms

Hunter Biden Trial Illustrates Which Side of Gun Debate Has Principles – Bearing Arms

I haven’t seen a lot from Hunter Biden that suggests he’s a good, decent person, and I’m not judging him for his drug addiction. Addiction runs in my family and I understand it pretty well. I’m not judging him for that in the least.

Some of the other stuff we saw on that laptop, however? Oh, I’m soooooo judging.

Yet, on some level, Biden’s conviction doesn’t really matter all that much to me. Yes, I believe that if anyone is going to be prosecuted for this–and plenty of people have, no matter what they try to sell you–then Hunter should be prosecuted, but there’s something deeper at play here.

One side of the gun debate has made it clear they actually have principles they stand by, and it’s not the one the media pretends is the one with integrity.

“It’s easy to say, Well, screw Biden and we should throw the book at him,” Eric Blandford, the Georgia state director for Gun Owners of America, told The Wall Street Journal. “Well, if they throw the book at the prince in every little way that they can, what are they going to do to you?”

Although gun-rights advocates view the president as one of the prime threats to the Second Amendment, they are standing behind his son on principle.

“Hunter Biden is innocent,” C.J. Grisham, a Texas lawyer and an early leader in the movement to carry guns in public, told the Journal. “I think Hunter Biden is a despicable person and I definitely don’t believe in his politics, but the fact of the matter is he is charged with a bogus crime.”

John Crump, a writer at the pro-gun site AmmoLand, authored an op-ed titled “Hunter Biden: You Must Acquit, the Law’s Not Legit.” The article contended that barring illicit drug users from owning guns doesn’t pass the test established by the Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen requiring gun laws to be deeply rooted in historical precedent.

Now, these three folks have a different take than I do, but only to a small extent. I, too, think the law in question is stupid and should be overturned. In fact, I’d find it hilarious if Hunter Biden takes this to the Supreme Court and gets it overturned.

But all of us maintain some consistency here. None of us like Joe or Hunter Biden, but we believe in the right to keep and bear arms to such a degree that we are willing to point out how the law used to prosecute someone on the other side of the political divide is wrong.

Where is Brady? Where is Giffords? What about Everytown?

While I get that they don’t want to alienate the Biden administration, they’ve had ample time to craft a message that at least sticks with their principles. They favor gun laws like this. They’d fight to protect gun laws like this. They’d scream bloody murder if such laws were repealed.

And yet, there’s absolutely nothing coming from them supporting the prosecution of Hunter Biden, support for the laws in question, nothing.

Where are their principles? They favor gun control, right? This should be a slam dunk. After all, a lot of them were ready to sell Kyle Rittenhouse down the river simply because the gun he had in hand was bought in another state, but Hunter bought a gun while a drug user–something illegal under laws these groups favor–and they say nothing one way or the other.

The truth is that while they pretend they’re non-partisan, they’re really just subsidiaries of the DNC. They’re organizations that are meant to at least appear independent but are anything but. They have no principles beyond getting Democrats elected.

For all the vilification of the NRA for getting off on non-Second Amendment topics on NRATV, it seems Big Gun Control was really just projecting and hoping no one would see through their BS.

Unfortunately for them, Hunter made that hope impossible.

Originally Posted on:

Written by:

5,561 Posts

View All Posts
Follow Me :

Leave a Reply