- WND - http://www.wnd.com -

Homeland floats 'national security' as excuse to take guns

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson

The Obama administration has tried repeatedly to push more gun control through Congress, unsuccessfully. It still is trying its hand at a strategy of simply depriving people of their Second Amendment rights.

Now it is signaling a new method, claiming that “gun control” is “part and parcel” of the federal government’s responsibility for homeland security.

It was presented by Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson during an appearance on CBS, when he made the claim no less than three or four times that gun control is now “part and parcel” of his agency’s responsibilities.

“I do believe,” he said, “that meanginful, responsible gun control is now part and parcel of homeland security.”

He continued, “It’s critical to public safety. We have to face the fact that meaningful, responsible gun control has to be part of Homeland Security. It’s coming I think the American public has to face.”

Hear him:

Obama pulled out all the stops several years ago to impose new gun control in the United States following the Sandy Hook school shooting tragedy. He’s also used regulations in a number of ways to deprive people of gun rights.

In fact, WND reported only this week that there’s a pending public comment period for a proposed rule that would strip gun rights from an estimated four million or more Americans, without any adjudication.

This infallible argument for armed self-defense presents real stories of Americans fighting back against criminals – and surviving because they were armed. “America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense In A Violent Age” is a must-read for anyone who has ever wondered if concealed carry can actually save and protect.

The administration already used a similar maneuver to begin removing gun rights from America’s veterans.

And it has prompted warnings that others getting any sort of payment from the federal government soon could be targeted similarly.

“They could go after student loan recipients. What about people getting food stamps? Medicaid? Potentially anybody working for any government contractor,” a critic warned.

Following last weekend’s attack by a radical Muslim on a homosexual bar in Florida, where more than four dozen were killed and at least as many injured, Democrats have begun demanding bans on some people buying “assault weapons,” although the long gun used in Orlando’s attack was a common rifle.

Responding to a question, Johnson told CBS depriving people of the right to buy – based on suspicion that puts them on a watch list, is “something that has to be addressed.”

At the Wall Street Journal, Julian Routh wrote that presidential candidates in the 2016 White House race are on opposite sides.

While Democrat Hillary Clinton called the rifle “weapons of war” and said they should not be on streets, GOP candidate Donald Trump rejected calls for more restrictions.

CBS reported the nation already has a no-fly list based on suspicion, and Johnson believes a no-buy list might be feasible.

Johnson described Obama as “frustrated” but still “determined” on the issue.

He not the only one exhibiting frustration. On Monday, Democrats in Congress shouted at House Speaker Paul Ryan, “demanding to know why the House isn’t considering gun control legislation,” according to a report.

Katie Pavlich at TownHall wrote, however, about the irony of the suggestion.

The Orlando shooter was employed by G4S security as a licensed, professional guard and authorized to carry a firearm on duty.

And the company holds contracts with the DHS to protect federal buildings and critical facilities such as nuclear sites.

Further, the Muslim terrorist was interviewed by the FBI several times.

“At no point were his security credentials revoked. Maybe instead of focusing on gun control, Johnson should be focused on not allowing DHS contracted companies to employ those under FBI investigation for terrorism,” Pavlich suggested.

This infallible argument for armed self-defense presents real stories of Americans fighting back against criminals – and surviving because they were armed. “America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense In A Violent Age” is a must-read for anyone who has ever wondered if concealed carry can actually save and protect.