Skip to content

Democrats Disarm Honest Citizens

September 4, 2017

Which political party wants to take your guns?

 I hadn’t considered that question until the last election.  Sure, I’d seen the usual campaign photos of politicians wearing hunters-orange and carrying a gun.  That picture changed when Secretary Hillary Clinton said the NRA was her enemy.  Since then, I’ve looked at the data.  The Democrats are out to disarm us.

I recently looked at why the concealed carry rate varies across the fifty states.  Fewer people receive their carry permits when politicians mandate long hours of training.  Fewer people apply for  their permits when the application is cumbersome and expensive.  As you’d expect, fewer of us are willing to pay these higher costs.

Rules matter more than money.

Fees and training only explains part of what we see.  The larger factor than the price of the permit is if we may apply for a permit at all.  States fall into three broad categories when they regulate concealed carry of a firearm in public.

Some states grant permits on a “may issue” basis.  In those states, a judge or sheriff may deny your application for any reason..or for no reason at all.  Politicians, judges, and retired law enforcement officers are the usual permit holders in “may issue” states.

Some states issue permits on a “shall issue” basis.  Law abiding citizens are granted a permit in those states.  There may be mandatory training and fees, but an ordinary citizen can successfully apply.

Some states said their firearms laws weren’t effective at disarming criminals.  Rather than disarm their honest citizens, these states adopted “unrestricted carry” also called constitutional carry.  There, you’re allowed to carry any firearm that you’re legally allowed to own.

The carry license rate rate varies from a high of over 15 percent down to zero in some states.  The number of us who will get our permit is determined by the issuing scheme and the costs in each state.  Those factors explain how many, but they don’t explain why.

Why do we see these large variations in fees and issuing regulations?

The answer is politics.  Some states have Democrats as their governor, attorney general, and in control of their legislatures.  Others states have Republicans in those positions.  The degree of Democrat control is strongly linked to the decline in carry permits.  Look at the next figure.  All the states in the upper left corner are Republican controlled while all the states in the lower right corner are all Democrat controlled.  The Democrat politician who carried a gun in a campaign poster wants you disarmed after he gets elected.

On average, the permit rate is about three-and-a-third times higher in Republican controlled states than in Democrat controlled states.  Said another way, about 70 percent of us are disarmed as we move from Republican to Democrat controlled states.  To put a number on it, 10.9 million of us are disarmed by state regulations today.

On average, Democrat controlled states impose higher fees and mandate longer training hours before they will issue a carry permit.  In some states, Democrats refuse to grant permits to any ordinary citizens.  All the states with an effective zero percent licensing rate use a “may issue” licensing scheme.  The states that use a “may issue” licensing scheme are all Democrat controlled.  They are shown in blue in the figure below. In contrast, most of the states that recognize “unrestricted carry” are Republican controlled or neutral.  They are shown in red.  Vermont is the single exception and has never required permits.

The facts are far different than the campaign promises.

I didn’t believe it at first, but now that I’ve looked at the data, Democrats really are out to disarm honest citizens. Widespread firearms prohibition is a fairly new political phenomenon.  Both parties used to support the right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.  There also was a time when Democrats supported the working middle class.  Today, the middle class wants to protect themselves at home and in public.  We will be better served when both political parties address our needs and recognize the right to bear arms.

I gave you 600 words and a lot of thought.  Please leave a comment and share.


23 Comments leave one →
  1. KUETSA permalink
    September 4, 2017 8:14 pm

    Well – YEA! If not at the national level – it is the state and local level of government, by political party, that is enforcing CITIZEN DISARMAMENT! We have TWO AMERICAS – free constitutional America – progressive socialist/communist America. In progressive socialist/communist America, the limits placed on government power by the US CONSTITUTION are being OVERCOME – INCREMENTALLY. A weaponized judiciary is the method of choice at this time. Progressive judges are in place to uphold EVERY CHUNK TAKEN OUT OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS! (There is less remaining that anyone thinks – the precedents are set) Right to keep and bear arms – SURE – but . . . no crazy weapons-of-war-that-have-no-place-on-our-streets!!! . . . and . . . NO ONE NEEDS 10 BULLETS TO KILL A DEER!!! (Though magazine capacity limitations have been found UNCONSTITUTIONAL in COMMIEFORNIA [believe it or not] THEY’RE JUST FINE AND DANDY IN NY!!! – well . . . unless you are an active or retired law enforcement official who’s LIFE WOULD BE PUT IN DANGER IF FORCED INTO SUCH LIMITATIONS . . . but everyone else – you’re fine. FREEDOM OF SPEECH – EVERYONE LOVES IT . . . unless it resembles anything close to what could vaguely be something WE CONSIDER TO BE HATE SPEECH!!! (Funny how that is always speech against THE PROGRESSIVE AGENDA) TRUMP saved us from the LORETTA LYNCH / BARACK OBAMA / HILLARY CLINTON EUROSOCIALIST STYLE HATE SPEECH LAWS – if not for TRUMP being elected we would be living in a Nazi type totalitarian state with ANTIFA and BLM ENFORCING THE PROGRESSIVE “RULES OF CONDUCT”!!! And what could you say about the fourth amendment???? WE ARE SPIED ON EVERYWHERE!!! Our phones – our new TVs – our computers – ARE ALL SPY DEVICES!!! (Well . . . I got nothing to hide) And protection against search and seizure???? YEA – WE ALL HAVE IT – EVERY DAY . . . UNTIL . . . they feel the need to search and seize . . . one day they may be looking for a 17 year old Muslim kid (Google up “Martial law in Watertown”) . . . TOMORROW THEY COULD DECLARE A NATIONAL EMERGENCY TO LOOK FOR ILLEGAL GUNS – AND GUESS WHAT – THEY OUTLAWED ALL GUNS*** – and they’ll roll the Watertown style Gestapo forces to rip us out of our homes at GUNPOINT to search and seize!!!

    ***Active and retired law enforcement officials are exempt from all firearm and magazine restrictions.

    The democrat party has “EVOLVED” into the progressive socialist/communist party and is working for globalist international interests, subverting our constitution and sovereignty, in order to achieve a post constitutional North American Union to be the sister union to the EU.


  2. September 4, 2017 9:19 pm

    This is no surprise to me, I live in a Democratically controlled state! I just wish President Trump could get a little breathing room and start asking for national reciprocity, but I fully realize that the GOPe and the Democrats don’t want to give him any chance of that. Thanks for writing this and give those of us who are willing to try and debate with people to try and get people to at least not fight or vote against RKBA more ammunition for the fight. I enjoy just about everything you post/write and wonder if you would mind if I “borrow” this information for a blog post?


  3. MarkPA permalink
    September 5, 2017 8:11 am

    No surprise here. Question is, will Americans tolerate such a denial of an explicit Federal Constitutional Right? What we have, here, is a form of “nobility”. An individual who is a member of the right “class” can get a permit to carry; either for himself, or for his employee. Others need not apply. Guns for men-of-means; for ordinary subjects, the “right” to go mano-a-mano with a thug outside our weight class.

    Those of us who reside in Right-to-Carry jurisdictions are complacent about Constitutional Rights in other States. Much the same prevailed prior to the Civil-Rights era. Voters in the North ignored segregation and denial of voting rights in the South; to say nothing of deprivation of life under color of law.

    As long as Congressmen from Right-to-Carry States may defy the 2A and retain their offices we are tolerating a deprecation of the Constitution in 1/5 of the States. If we tolerate this deprecation, we will learn to tolerate others.

    Is there a right to speak or peaceably assemble in California to express politically-incorrect views? Is the 1A subject to States-Rights? The 4A? The 5A?


  4. September 5, 2017 8:51 am

    Clear and concise. Anyone who doesn’t understand this doesn’t WANT to understand this.


  5. Rich permalink
    September 5, 2017 12:11 pm

    Hillary Clinton Delegate Explains Her Deceptive Propaganda to Ban Guns – Freedom Outpost
    Of course, much of what she said is no mystery. It has been common phraseology to say that one is for “common sense gun legislation.” The reality is that kind of talk is actually “communist gun legislation.”
    “Saying you want to ban guns altogether, that’s going to piss everybody off,” Clinton alternate delegate Mary Bayer told the undercover Project Veritas reporter.
    So, she reveals openly that this is the ultimate goal, not some common sense legislation. She realizes that it will not only upset people, but it is unlawful and this is the reason they try to deceive the people.”You have to take that sort of moderate… ‘We just wanna have common sense legislation so our children are safe!'” Bayer added. “You say sh*t like that, and then people will buy into it.”
    The real issue is that the Constitution gives absolutely zero authority for those in government to write legislation that restricts or bans the ability of citizens to keep and bear arms of any kind, including warships and tanks. So, Congress can write all the words they want to write and in the end, they are simply acting unlawfully and treasonous against the people they are supposed to be serving.


  6. Geoff permalink
    September 5, 2017 1:54 pm

    IMO. The only “reasonable” restrictions are those in the “prohibited person” list from the ATF, and I don’t agree with all of them. Bouncing checks is a felony, but deny the right to own a firearm because of it? Not reasonable. I’m sure exceptions to the rest of the list could be made also. But that isn’t up to me.
    All other gun controls laws are an infringement.


  7. MaddMedic permalink
    September 5, 2017 3:09 pm

    Reblogged this on Freedom Is Just Another Word….


  8. Tim permalink
    September 5, 2017 3:10 pm

    even in a good state for conceal carry, if you have to defend yourself, expect to do it again in court (you will need deep pockets). Even the prosecutors are looking to make a name for themselves.


  9. TheRon permalink
    September 5, 2017 4:51 pm

    Only Your Enemy Wants You Disarmed!


  10. TheRon permalink
    September 5, 2017 4:57 pm

    The Federal Government has NO delegated powers re: the armed citizenry EXCEPT those it calls into service and EMPLOYS (Article I, Section 8:15-16). And without the 10th Amendment it may LAWFULLY do NOTHING! The 2nd Amendment was added along with the other Bill of Rights (only the People have rights) to absolutely confirm that understanding! Therefore, ALL Federal gun laws pertaining to the People are UNLAWFUL!


    • September 6, 2017 6:51 am

      NO 2nd amendment?


      • TheRon permalink
        September 6, 2017 8:38 am

        Oh yes, if you read the Preamble to the Bill of Rights, they were added to prevent “abuses and usurpations” . But even with the 2nd Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights, we still have rampant and flagrant “abuses and usurpations”. We need stiff penalties, jail or death, for government officials, agents and especially judges, who evince to abuse or usurp the enumerated rights and even non-enumerated rights (9th Amendment) of the People.


  11. September 5, 2017 5:59 pm

    Democrats = Gun Control = Registration = Confiscation

    This is their only plan and has been from the beginning. We must be on constant alert.
    The only way to stop them is to vote them out of office. Every local, state, and federal
    election …. vote them out.


    • TheRon permalink
      September 6, 2017 8:43 am

      Voting is a very soft way to punish those who attack and try to deny our rights. If it’s “the only way”, our rights are at the mercy of democratic tyranny. As Jefferson wrote, where 51% can take away the rights of the other 49%.


  12. Chris permalink
    September 6, 2017 9:54 am

    I disagree with this:
    “Widespread firearms prohibition is a fairly new political phenomenon. Both parties used to support the right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. ”

    – Before the Civil War, response to incidents like Nat Turner’s slave rebellion led Democrats to prohibit free blacks from possession of any arms.
    – Right after the Civil War, the Democrats passed “black codes” in the reconstructed South, primarily to disarm freed blacks and ensure they would remain easily victimized by their paramilitary thugs like the KKK.
    – A generation later, Jim Crow laws sponsored by Democrats again attacked the rights of black Americans to possess firearms. If you look at the “may issue” statutes, pistol permitting schemes, and so on, many of them date back to this era. In the North, statutes like NY’s Sullivan Act were aimed by racist Democrat Machine politicians at recent immigrants.
    – A generation later, Democrats led the charge with the Gun Control Act of 1968. Again, it was a tool to disarm poor blacks.
    – A generation later, Democrats led the charge with the 1991 AWB. And in 2012 — and since — the Democrats have doubled down on a citizen disarmament agenda.

    Justice Thomas summarizes over a century of this attack on civil rights in his concurring opinion to McDonald. His opinion starts on page 65. But you can just “CTRL-F” search terms like “Klan” or “Black.”

    Click to access 08-1521.pdf

    Widespread firearms prohibition has been a tool used by Democrats to disarm people since the Reconstruction after the Civil War. Before the Civil War the same Democrats kept people in slavery and of course disarmed them.

    The Democrats have been implacably opposed to armament of the people for over two hundred years. With a few fleeting exceptions like the Blue Dog Democrats pandering to Red State sentimentalities after the party got swept from office following the ’91 AWB the trend is pretty clear. Let’s not pretend that there was some previous “golden age” of bipartisan support for this civil right.



  1. SayUncle » Of course, they need people dependent on the state
  2. Which political party wants to take your guns? See for yourself.
  3. The Correlation Between Democrats and Disarmament «
  4. Which Political Party Wants You Disarmed? | Give Me Liberty
  5. Episode 422 – Dr John Edeen | The Polite Society Podcast

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: