Grassroots Commentary

Talkradio, 2012 Candidates and Gun Laws

John Longenecker · Aug. 10, 2011

American Talkradio is an enormous success. It’s secret is that it is in touch with the electorate where no one else is. This includes some segments of FOX News as much as Congress and 2012 Presidential Candidates.

What makes conservative talkradio succeed and liberal talkradio fail is in the light speed comparing of notes, and therefore the strong position to hear from listeners and to be in touch. Conservative, libertarian and independent hosts such as Lou Dobbs, Rush Limbaugh, Dennis Prager and Dr. Laura are all good listeners and they resonate with listener values and with electorate life realities. This makes all the difference between elites and voters, movie stars and fans, recording artists and consumers, and others.

Talk show hosts are in a better position to live with the very same realities their listeners live with. Liberal hosts not only do not live with the realities of their listeners, but they also do not have to live with the consequences of their leftist policies. As one primary for instance, many liberal lawmakers are armed one way or another by carrying a loaded sidearm or hiring armed guards, and last year, California lawmakers had asked for latitude in concealed carry permits for themselves. Lawmakers have made California a second amendment hostile state while asking to be armed themselves. Is that out of touch, or what?

Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly are two hosts who are just a little off when they talk about guns and regulation. I don’t know if Bill O. has a concealed weapon permit, but we know that Hannity does. Lots of hosts and officials have a CCW, but they still miss a few things about the subject we have to live with here on the ground. Bureaucrats second-guessing the electorate.

First, the target of violence is the best first line of defense for self and for community. A target of violence has not only a right to self-defense, but also the legal authority to stop a crime in progress, and may use all reasonable force under the circumstances in the absence of police. The genius of concealed weapons is that thugs do not know who is armed and who is not, and this is a most redeeming societal safeguard when we are talking about violence and smaller government endeavors. Fight crime effectively and you can reduce the need for many bureaucracies which depend on violence to survive.

On this subject, so-called sensible regulation is enunciated by some hosts and some presidential candidates. Forty-nine states affirm the armed citizen and most states have no need for registration of guns. (They obviously believe that they – as the government – do not really need to know where the guns are after all.) For those values and societal safeguards to be cloned to work in states severely troubled by violence, there can be no such thing as sensible gun laws, and that means no such thing as reasonable regulation. For, the outcome is interference with the judgment and ability of the citizen to fight crime where it is fought best: at the scene of the crime, before it can be completed. “Regulation” interferes with the citizen’s ability to carry where they like, carry what they like, and who may even carry.

You see, regulation interferes with the choices of America’s most trusted citizens, and has no effect on America’s most distrusted thugs. “Regulation” interferes with a woman’s right to stop a rape in progress, a beating, or parent’s ability to stop his child’s abduction. Or, worse.

Oh, and one more thing about ‘regulation’: the second amendment is the lethal force which backs our sovereign authority as supreme. Any and all gun laws are a challenge to that authority and therefore reflect a very poor understanding of who is in fact the Sovereign under our system.

How many candidates can you count who will actually say that our authority is supreme in this country? I can think of three. The ability to stop a violent act is itself blocked by gun control, and this serves the bigger government, statist interests. Gun control needs to be repealed.

Lou Dobbs had me on his show to detail how the health of the second amendment is the primary indicator of the overall health of the nation. Lou Dobbs – Mr. Independent – understands the concept as one of independence. This is almost the entire point of the second amendment. Being independent of our public servants in personal safety greatly impeaches any other presumptions of purpose public servants want to propose in their immense transfer of wealth. Gun control facilitates such transfers of wealth.

Once you let servants believe you will delegate your personal safety to them, they understand rather clearly that you will delegate anything. Isn’t this how we got to such a large government? Isn’t this how they disrespect the people?

Talkradio plays an important role in self-rule. It broadcasts listener interaction unfiltered and is one of the best discovery processes of the electorate. With regard to the 2012 elections, the subject of the ubiquitous armed citizen as a peaceable means of reducing violent crime can mean smaller government, and not take as long as one might think. It will mean that candidates must stump on the promise of reducing the size of bureaucracies by the repeal of gun control as soon as possible.

Talkradio’s success is that it is in touch with the electorate. Talkradio does not dictate to the listeners, it resonates with the listeners in values, integrity and purpose. It affirms our values as the Sovereign.

Wouldn’t it be great if candidates were just as in touch with constituents? There’s one way to find out.

John Longenecker shows the moral purpose and public interest between the ubiquitous armed citizen and the CPR-trained society in Even Safer Streets 2011 – The Second Amendment as a Mainstream Value now available in paperback and digital formats.

Coronavirus got you homebound?
Stay current with America’s News Digest.