Earlier this week on “The View,” Meghan McCain defended her right to defend herself with a gun. She also warned that gun confiscation efforts could lead to violence:
Meghan McCain, after saying there will be "violence" in America if the AR-15 is banned because it's "the most popular gun" in the country, then declares that she's "not living without guns." pic.twitter.com/YlDtQwkFr0
— Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona) September 3, 2019
Nothing inherently wrong with what she said, but that didn’t stop self-righteous gun grabbers from going to town. They not only lost it over her “I’m not living without guns” comment, but they decided that McCain was advocating for gun violence.
Ignoring the fact that McCain suggested a violent insurrection as a normal response to a change in gun policy, Behar then noted that gun owners have lived without AR-15 before. McCain pushed back. “I’m not living without guns!” McCain yelled. “It’s just that simple.”
— Brody Levesque (@BrodyLevesque) September 3, 2019
Meghan McCain suggests civilians will shoot other Americans if there’s an assault weapons ban: "The AR-15 is by far the most popular gun in America … if you’re talking about taking people’s guns, there’s going to be a lot of violence."#walmart
— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) September 3, 2019
That’s not what McCain was suggesting, but Watts and her ilk don’t care. Beto O’Rourke, who’s been advocating for the sort of mandatory gun confiscation program McCain is warning against, certainly doesn’t care:
— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) September 5, 2019
— The Hill (@thehill) September 5, 2019
More from the Daily Beast:
“I just I think that kind of language and rhetoric is not helpful,” the former congressman told The Daily Beast prior to joining a Wednesday marathon climate town hall on CNN. “It becomes self-fulfilling; you have people on TV who are almost giving you permission to be violent and saying, ‘You know this is this is going to happen.’”
O’Rourke brought up McCain’s name unprompted after “The View” host had said, earlier this week, that an attempt by the government to compel AR-15 owners to sell back their weapons would prompt “a lot of violence.”
“When someone says, “If you do this, then this will happen,” O’Rourke said, “almost as though that’s a natural response or maybe even something that should happen or deserves to happen. When I think the response should be, ‘We’re doing nothing now and we’re seeing people slaughtered in their schools, at work, at a Walmart, in a synagogue, in a church, at a concert. There is violence right now and it is horrifying and it is terrifying and it is terrorizing.’…. We should be worried about that kind of violence right now.”
Ackshually, Beto, we should be worried about the kind of violence spurred on by people like you who have made it your life’s work to demonize law-abiding gun owners. Constantly painting gun owners as the enemy only puts targets on their backs, because it’s essentially justifying violence against them. If they’re the enemy, it’s OK to hurt them.
O’Rourke is hurting gun owners, and hurting the gun debate. Because he’s deliberately ignoring the potentially catastrophic consequences of trying to forcibly strip millions of law-abiding Americans of their constitutional right. That’s a recipe for disaster. McCain understand that. O’Rourke could not care less.
Did @BetoORourke even watch the interview and what she was saying?
She said "If you're talking about going and taking people's guns away from them, there's going to be a lot of violence."
If you are going to forcefully take them away, of course there will be violence.
— NewBeginnings (@NewBegi54516996) September 5, 2019
If you want to confiscate guns from tens of millions of people, you're the one instigating violence. https://t.co/lGSpoGamG2
— David Harsanyi (@davidharsanyi) September 5, 2019
Yep. And for what it’s worth, Beto O’Rourke has come a lot closer than Meghan McCain to killing someone.
Amazing that a drunk-driving, hit-and-running, home-invading gun grabber is accusing someone else of violence. https://t.co/COgGoZXtC1
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) September 5, 2019
You drove drunk and nearly killed someone and then tried to flee the scene, so chill. If you want to discuss rhetoric, you’re granting gov’t permission to take arms and go door to door to confront innocent, lawful Americans and steal their property from them. https://t.co/LSkoMXmzWs
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) September 5, 2019
You drove drunk, fled the scene of a crime and wrote books on murdering children. Take a seat Bobby.
— Kristina Hoffmeyer (@kmh40) September 5, 2019
I’d argue you’re “almost giving” people permission to, drive drunk, get in an accident, flee the scene where people are hurt, and, then well, to run for President of course
— Nate Velazquez (@TheReal_NateDog) September 5, 2019