By J . D. Heyes, editor-in-chief
(National Sentinel)Â Censorship:Â On a recent program, MSNBC co-host Joe Scarborough insisted that Americans â€œdonâ€™t have a God-given rightâ€ to an AR-15 rifle, which he previously described as a â€œmilitary-style weapon.â€
The Supreme Court supports his position, he claimed, adding that the court has upheld various gun bans around the country including â€˜assault weapons bansâ€™ in some of the most liberal states in the country.
Well, Joe, I guess it depends a lot on your interpretation of â€œGod-given,â€ and by that I mean, weâ€™d have to go back to the writing and ratification of the Second Amendment. We have to remember the men who wrote the Bill of Rights recognized them as â€œinalienableâ€ â€” unable to be taken away by the government â€” and indeed, â€˜God-given,â€™ as our founders were Christian men.
Then there is that part of the Second Amendmentâ€™s â€œright to keep and bear armsâ€ not being â€œinfringed,â€ which is what gun bans do.
But besides all of that, I think itâ€™s safe to say that weâ€™d both agree on one thing: The founders certainly did not expect gun merchants who are currently selling a constitutionally-protected product to be punished by American financial institutions.
And yet, thatâ€™s precisely what The New York Times is suggesting (notice how those creeps always use the First Amendment to attack the Second Amendment).
As reported by Awr Hawkins at Breitbart News, a piece in the Times by Andrew Ross Sorkin proposes that banks circumvent Congress and the will of a majority of Americans to â€œcontrol guns salesâ€ by refusing to do business with gun sellers. He writes:
Hereâ€™s an idea. What if the finance industry â€” credit card companies like Visa, Mastercard and American Express; credit card processors like First Data; and banks like JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo â€” were to effectively set new rules for the sales of guns in America? Collectively, they have more leverage over the gun industry than any lawmaker. And it wouldnâ€™t be hard for them to take a stand.
Sorkin later says that such a decision by financial companies is akin to â€œleadership and courageâ€ â€” though one suspects heâ€™d certainly not call it â€œleadership and courageâ€ if these same companies began refusing to do business with, say, Muslim clients or companies owned or operated by LGBTQ individuals.
To this consummate Leftist and the rag he works for, itâ€™s perfectly fine to discriminate, as long as youâ€™re discriminating against the â€˜rightâ€™ people. Like gun sellers.
What a huge hypocrite.
The fact is, however, what Sorkinâ€™s proposing has already been done â€” by the Obama administrationâ€™s Justice Department. Before the Obama DOJ began looking for new and industrious ways to violate the rights of Donald J. Trump and his campaign, it was implementing Operation Chokepoint, which was aimed, in part, at cutting off the finances of businesses that sold â€œassault weapons.â€ [Itâ€™s been targeted for closure under the Trump administration, Hawkins reports].
Sorkin noted that already companies including PayPal, Square, Stripe, and Apple Pay â€œannounced years ago that they would not allow their services to be used for the sale of firearmsâ€ [but the sale of cigarettes, cars, and liquor â€” all of which kill more Americans than guns â€” is just fine].
So why not expand that to include all financial institutions and banks? Because thatâ€™s what â€œcorporate responsibilityâ€ looks like to Sorkin, who of course doesnâ€™t run a corporation and whose newspaper hates them anyway (unless of course, weâ€™re talking about that huge corporation known as The New York Times Co.).
â€œThe message is clear,â€ Hawkins writes. â€œIf Senators and House members stand for the Second Amendment instead of gun control, then circumvent those Senators and House Members via a monolithic approach to banking that omits any financial opportunity related to â€˜assault weapons.â€™â€
Whatâ€™s also clear is that American Left has no problem employing economic terrorism and financial discrimination against companies they dislike.
The solution here is not to “bargain with” or “accommodate” the true haters who run these companies. The solution is for conservative entrepreneurs to launch their own start-ups to rival the dominance of Leftist-owned corporations who have decided that alienating a plurality or even a small majority of Americans is good business.
What other choices do freedom-loving, liberty-minded, America-firsters have? My prediction is such start-ups would quickly grow and soon outmatch the Left-wing group-think corporations.
To hell with trying to “reach” these people. We shouldn’t have to alter our commerce to suit their liberal sensibilities.
We need your help to fight social media censorship! Find out how by clicking here!