Marxist Ideology and the Push Against Militia Weapons in the USA

These semi-auto hunting rifles are excellent militia weapons.

Under the ideological of cultural Marxism and the framework of Marxist "Woke" ideologies, power must be taken from a majority population. Firearms, as noted by the Marxist and Chinese mass murderer Mao, are a form of political power. Mao wrote:

Every Communist must grasp the truth: Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.

What Mao meant was only the Communist party should be allowed to have guns. For a Marxist revolution to succeed, the people must be disarmed.  The left in the United States has long pushed for the disarmament of the population. Recently, the left has primarily pushed for the banning of those arms which are commonly available and most suitable for militia use. These are modern semi-automatic rifles with standard capacity magazines of 30 rounds.  These type of rifles are admirably suited to the defense of homes and neighborhoods, in part, because they are understood to be extremely effective, and as such, have great deterrent value.

The American founding fathers understood the political power of firearms as well. They had just won a war with the superpower of the age, England. The English king had repeatedly attempted to disarm first, the colonists, then the revolutionaries. The founders wished to make sure no future American government would be able to disarm the American people. Thus, they included the guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms in the Bill of Rights. The founders understood the right to keep and bear arms included defense against all threats, from animals, criminals, other nations and domestic tyrants.

Many infringements on the right to keep and bear arms have been tolerated by the people of the United States, as long as the infringements were applied to disfavored minorities. 

During the existence of the United States, the vast majority of people could easily purchase a rifle, shotgun, or pistol, with little difficulty in all states. Disfavored minorities, particularly black people, had a difficult time purchasing handguns in some places. Disfavored minorities were seldom prohibited from buying rifles and shotguns. Most of those infringements were in states dominated by the Democratic party.  Even in states who were most hostile to the Second Amendment, rifles and shotguns were easy to get. The greatest push was to ban handguns, because handguns were commonly used in crime. Rifles and shotguns are rarely used in crime. Many political commentators made the claim restricting handguns did not affect the Second Amendment, because there was easy access to rifles and shotguns.

As Americans perceived the growth of the political bureaucracy, and the disfavor with which the Constitution was held by the political class, resistance to disarmament grew. The push to ban handguns failed.  As a way to revive the failing fortunes of those pushing for population disarmament, Josh Sugermann advocated for a ban on "Assault Weapons" in 1988. From Reason.com:

Josh Sugarmann, founder and executive director of the Violence Policy Center, laid out this strategy of misdirection and obfuscation in a 1988 report on "Assault Weapons and Accessories in America." Sugarmann observed that "the weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons."

He added that because "few people can envision a practical use for these guns," the public should be more inclined to support a ban on "assault weapons" than a ban on handguns. While handguns are by far the most common kind of firearm used to commit crimes, they are also the most popular choice for self-defense. Proscribing "assault weapons" therefore sounds more reasonable.

Sugarmann's predictions fell flat. The market for semi-automatic rifles grew and grew. The more the left attempted to ban them, the more popular they became. Much of the popularity came from a growing resistance to the "Deep State" as the people became dissatisfied with the disconnect between what politicians did and what they said. The Second Amendment gained vocal and organized supporters. A ten-year failed federal "Assault Weapon" ban was not renewed. A super majority of states reformed their gun laws, removing more and more infringements. The Supreme Court affirmed the Second Amendment meant what it said. At present, over half of the United States do not require a permit to carry a loaded handgun, openly or concealed.

A minority of historically repressive states with hard-left governments are resisting this trend. They include California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois,, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island. Colorado, and Washington State are recent additions. They are working to ban the most effective militia weapons commonly available in the United States. Weapons which are seldom used in crime. Their laughable "reason" is semi-automatic rifles with standard capacity magazines are used in the rare mass murder, when, in fact, pistols are used more commonly in mass murder.  Judge Benitez, in his classic opinion on the California ban on "Assault Weapons" says it very well:

Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment. Good for both home and battle, the AR-15 is the kind of versatile gun that lies at the intersection of the kinds of firearms protected under District of Columbia v. Heller,  554 U.S. 570 (2008) and United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939).

Leftist politicians in a few states insist on banning the most effective militia weapons.  Activists openly state they do not trust the people with "military" weapons. The Shade of Chairman Mao would approve.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch