Cuomo: People Who Oppose Gun Law Are Paranoid Extremists
March 25, 2013  //  By:   //  Andrew Cuomo, Gun Control, New York  //  15 Comments   //   1159 Views

I’d go with anti-oppressive Constitutional realists.  But that’s just me.

Referring to the NRA lawsuit against New York state which contests the constitutionality of the SAFE Act as “propaganda”, Governor Cuomo proceeded to lay into those who oppose the law as paranoid extremists devoid of facts.

Via Capitol Confidential:

What the extremists do is spread fear and unrealistic theories of conspiracies and the citizenry that needs to be armed because the government is possibly tyrannical, and they need their arms to defend themselves against the tyrannical government,” Cuomo continued. This is true: at gun rallies, I’ve heard this “slippery slope” line of argument from multiple attendees. They view the right to bear arms as a kind of check against government power.

Malarchy, Cuomo said.

“Common sense. Cool heads. Moderation. And remember there’s a majority of people in this state, this nation [that support gun control measures] and they have rights, too. It’s not just the Second Amendment right. People have a right to be safe,” he said. “Criminals and the mentally ill don’t have a right to a gun. They don’t. And you need a system and government regulation to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill.”

“These people are spreading fear because the facts don’t work for them,” Cuomo said.

First off, the Second Amendment is an absoulte right guaranteed by the Constitution.  It can not be trumped by a made up generalization such as “people have a right to be safe”.  Assuming that Second Amendment advocates getting their way will result in people being less safe makes Cuomo sound … well … paranoid.

Second, you can’t complain about people “spreading fear” a few seconds after saying your anti-gun legislation grants people the “right to be safe”.  That’s spreading fear.

Third, your strongest argument is in keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.  But that was something insisted upon by Republicans in the bill, not you.

Fourth, it doesn’t matter whether or not people buy into the theory that they need a gun to protect themselves from a tyrannical government.  The Second Amendment was put in place for that very reason, and whether or not you believe it is nonsense is completely irrelevant.  The Founding Fathers were indeed referring to such a scenario when they granted this right – they weren’t debating the merits of deer hunting.

Fifth, I’ll take a paranoid extremist who follows the Constitution over a paranoid extremist who spits upon the Constitution any day.

About the Author :

Rusty Weiss is a freelance journalist focusing on the conservative movement and its political agenda. He has been writing conservatively charged articles for several years in the upstate New York area, and his writings have appeared in the Daily Caller, American Thinker, FoxNews.com, Big Government, the Times Union, and the Troy Record. He is also Editor of one of the top conservative blogs of 2012, the Mental Recession.

15 Comments to “Cuomo: People Who Oppose Gun Law Are Paranoid Extremists”
  • James Fitzhenry
    March 25, 2013 - Reply

    Well said!

  • gooms
    March 25, 2013 - Reply

    Sorry, but the SAFE gun bill passed in New York is OWNED by the Republican Party.

    The bill first passed the State Senate of which the Republican caucus has the majority. It then easily passed the Assembly, controlled by the Democrats and then Cuomo signed it.

    If the REPUBLICANS in the New York State Senate opposed this bill, it could NOT have been passed.

    The SAFE bill is a law owned and passed by Republicans.

    • Bill Willis
      March 26, 2013 - Reply

      Whether the law is owned by one or the other of the parties is irrelevant. The two-party system is all smoke and mirrors, meant to distract us from what’s really going on. What is relevant is that any gun control law is in direct opposition to the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment provides We The People with a defense against a tyrannical government which, in case anyone hasn’t noticed, we have now.

    • thepatriot
      April 15, 2013 - Reply

      Sorry but thats more retoric, you are a typical anti American who should move to a country where you don’t have to be mad about rights because you won’t have any. Also how about keeping dangerous criminals in prison because if they are too dangerous to have guns they are too dangerous to be free. Everyone should have to pass a background check and obtain a license to speak because stupidity is harmful to children.

  • Al Schneider
    March 25, 2013 - Reply

    People who IMPOSE TYRANNICAL GUN LAWS…

    on LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS…

    are simply…DICTATORIAL KLEPTOMANIACS!

    In other words…SADISTIC PSYCHOTIC LUNATICS!

    Any questions?!

  • Jim Hemauer
    March 26, 2013 - Reply

    “The Founding Fathers were indeed referring to such a scenario when they granted this right . . .”
    A good article, but I have to point out that the Founding Fathers did not GRANT the right to keep and bear arms, that right is self-evident. The Founding Fathers GUARANTEED the right to keep and bear arms.
    The government does not grant the people the right to free speech, freedom of religion, or the freedom to protect themselves from tyranny. All men and women are born with those inherent rights.

  • Martha Lee Vincent
    March 26, 2013 - Reply

    We are not paranoid extremists, it is our constitutional right to own guns. Cuomo, you are the one out of place, it is not your place or right to tell me or any citizen that they cannot own a gun. You WILL be defeated in the next election for your arrogance against the people.

  • Dwayne Wolski
    March 26, 2013 - Reply

    Gee, and I bet being “paranoid” would be one of those things that keeps you from being able to have a gun.

  • Dwayne Wolski
    March 26, 2013 - Reply

    Oh, and I don’t remember the “right to be safe” mentioned in the constitution. I do remember the part about the feds being responsible for our border protection though. I also recall thst a state has the right to go to war if they are being invaded. No invasion from citizens of our country, but there are Mexicans, Poles, and Chinese to name a few that are invading. And what is happening with them? Notbing, but you are going to take your citizens weapons away. What an a$$ backwards way of doing things.

    • Rusty Weiss
      March 28, 2013 - Reply

      “Right to be safe” is a ludicrous platform anyway. It can’t be defined. Reminds me of an old Chris Rock bit where if he were running for office, his slogan would be “I believe all babies should eat”. Cuomo is dumbing down the discourse to appeal to his low-information left-wing base.

  • Robert Miller
    March 29, 2013 - Reply

    All politicians, before taking their oaths to serve and protect the Constitution, should be forced to do some mandatory reading. Starting first and foremost with John Locke’s Second Treatise of Civil Government. After reading, they would be required to pass a standardized test (good enough for our children, good enough for them) of which the basis is basic understanding of natural law and the basis of society and government.

    Out of this reading they are expected to respect our natural right to self-defense, by removing all obstacles that unduly restrict it (ie, gun free zones). Respect that the people have the right to not only get out from under tyranny, but to prevent it from taking root. And respect that any politician that breaks that trust has placed themselves at a state of war with the people … that John Locke was pretty awesome, now we see why Thomas Jefferson consulted his works to build the case against the throne, while he wrote the Declaration of Independence.

Leave a reply