“The NRA is going to be mad at me.” So said David LaGrand (D), mayor of the second largest city in the state of Michigan. We don’t get mad, however, when firearm prohibitionists reveal their true feelings in an unfiltered way. It’s actually very helpful to our cause.
Gun owners and many of LeGrand’s fellow Michiganders, on the other hand, are rightfully incensed at the mayor’s dismissive, ignorant, scolding attitude toward their rights, their culture, and their choices. Dog lovers aren’t too happy, either.
Last week, the first-term mayor of Grand Rapids held a community meeting where he was expected to address community policing policies in the wake of an officer-involved shooting that is currently under investigation. However, rather directly address the incident itself, the mayor used his time to offer his personal philosophy on, among other things, guns and gun ownership. By now, many within the Second Amendment community have heard these gems:
On gun owners: “I think if you got a gun, you should be ashamed of yourself. I really do.” He repeated, “I think if you own a gun, you should be ashamed of yourself. And you should really do some self-reflection.”
On hoping to rally the community to his point of view: “As a community, we have to start having some shaming around gun possession.”
On the utility of guns: “No one gardens with a gun. No one changes a tire with a gun. What they are for is killing human beings.”
On his attempt to concoct a suitable analogy for how he feels about guns: “I get that we got a Second Amendment … but you also should also be ashamed if you smoke. … just like cigarettes, I see so much more harm than benefit.”
On his response to a police K-9 chasing down a suspect: “It is time that we ask, ‘What are dogs good for?’ Like, if you need a dog to find someone in the woods, get a hound dog. If you need to chase somebody in a backyard, why couldn’t you do that with a drone? If my dog did what I saw in that video, I’d put my dog down.”
Some self-reflection is indeed indicated, not for gun owners, but for voting citizens, legal academia, and Democrat Party officials in the form of embarrassed wonderment at how LaGrand is in a leadership position.
For voters, the self-reflection comes in the uncomfortable realization that LaGrand was elected as the Mayor of Grand Rapids, a city of nearly 200,000 citizens, after previously serving as a Michigan state representative. Self-reflection is also in order for the University of Chicago Law School, where LaGrand studied law but apparently not the U.S. Constitution. And self-reflection is due the Democrat Party, which is increasingly out of touch with the values and concerns of ordinary Americans in favor of elite donors and globalist megalomaniacs whose preoccupations reflect a worldview divorced from common reality.
What was previously the “quiet part” of the gun control agenda is now increasingly broadcast aloud as a badge of membership in this ambitious fringe. We recently reported on the punditry wing of this phenomenon in Gun Control “Journalist” Says the Quiet Part Out Loud. While there may be a collective scoff at the rank absurdity of LaGrand’s comments, they were simply an unguarded expression of deeply held convictions, convictions LaGrand and many in his party want to turn into binding public policy.
LaGrand relished saying, “The NRA is going to be mad at me,” oblivious of the fact that the NRA isn’t a monolithic entity in Washington, D.C., but an organization of millions of mothers, fathers, sisters, and brothers, young and old, in every corner of this country, including in his own community. He was mocking them and their deep commitment to the safety and freedoms of their families and their community, first and foremost.
Inevitably, having spoken his mind and experienced the effect his thoughts had on the broader world outside his political bubble, LaGrand was forced to backtrack. He put out a “clarifying” statement that lamely attempted to distinguish what he called his “expression of personal frustration and deep sorrow” with his responsibilities and limitations as a public official. “I am fully aware that the Second Amendment and state law limit the policy options available to a municipal leader. I cannot legislate this pain away. Therefore, my comments were not a signal of impending policy,” he said.
Indeed, if LaGrand’s comments spark self-reflection among gun owners, it should include gratitude for the constitutional constraints and state firearm preemption laws that prohibit municipal tier politicians like him from turning their emoting into enforceable edicts. And, hopefully, it will include a renewed commitment to protecting those safeguards against public officials who are not content merely to scold their constituents for exercising their fundamental liberties as Americans.
More Like This From Around The NRA
