Gunning for Trouble

A sinister power play in New Mexico.

By
210
Then-Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM), chairwoman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, delivers remarks following a meeting between U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly and members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus at the U.S. Capitol March 17, 2017 in Washington, DC. Grisham was elected governor of New Mexico in 2018. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

On an episode of The Remnant last week, Jonah Goldberg and Tom Nichols had a friendly argument.

Why is it, Jonah asked, that a subset of anti-Trump conservatives have embraced the Democratic agenda whole cloth? Nicolle Wallace, Jennifer Rubin—you know the type. They made their names as right-wingers yet now side with liberals so reliably in any dispute with the GOP as to be indistinguishable from the “Resistance” leftists they’re aligned with.

Nichols isn’t part of that group (he wrote critically of Joe Biden’s preposterous student debt forgiveness plan, he reminded Jonah) but he’s a fellow traveler insofar as he’s committed to voting for Biden over Trump next year. The threat Trump poses to America’s institutions is so dire, Nicholas reasoned, that as a patriot he has no choice but to support the one party capable of defeating it.

Okay, Jonah replied, but why not use the leverage you’ve gained as a member of the Democratic coalition to drag it toward the center? If anti-Trump conservatives still prefer right-wing policies on balance to left-wing ones, they should press their new party to adopt some of those policies as it evolves.

This content is available exclusively to Dispatch members
Try a membership for full access to every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism.
Start Your Free Trial
Already a paid member? Sign In
210
By
Comments (210)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    I was surprised to see Hogg take the principled position here because he can be such a hack. Good for him. This kind of “rule by emergency” is how the left got us to Trump.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Stephanie

    Amusing to see the freak-out over guns. And coming from a bunch of people who are just fine with Ron DeSantis tromping all over the First Amendment. But then I believe Heller was wrongly decided, and it’s direct result has been the awful wave of gun violence we now are forced to endure.

    Some people should not have guns.

    Several days ago a man convicted of murder escaped from prison in PA. He’s on the loose now. He’s also now armed with a 22 caliber rifle with a scope, because the doofus who owned it left it leaning against the wall of his garage. Lovely.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Brianboyce

      Heller? Are you saying that legal gun owners and licensed concealed-carriers are responsible for "the awful wave of gun violence?" That's clearly not the case.

      Legal gun owners and legal carriers are something like seven times less likely to commit a crime than sworn police officers. It happens, don't get me wrong - road rage seems to be the most common, but generally people who get fingerprinted and background checked do not intend to commit crimes.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Stephanie

        How sure are you that it is not the case?

        All the mass shootings--as far as I know--have been by people with no criminal record. There are also shootings of individuals not by criminals. There are plenty of men shooting the women they've been domestically abusing. There are children taking guns from where they are irresponsibly stored, and shooting each other, or their first grade teacher.

        You'd have to really have your head in the sand to think there is not a huge problem. Just compare the statistics in the US and Europe (where there truly is a responsible attitude toward firearms and respect for them being lethal weapons).

        The NRA has been trying to boost gun sales for years, in conjunction with gun manufacturers. The demand for guns has been created by NRA propaganda. I imagine there is no real need for anyone to have a hand gun, or an assault-style gun. People just think they do.

        Look at the guy whose rifle was stolen. He observed the that. he think fired several shots at the thief. All of which missed.

        People firing wildly can easily hit innocent bystanders. Who's to vouch that all these people packing heat actually know how to behave in situations that cops have to train for?

        And why should gun owners feel entitled to carry out capital punishment for say, theft of their TV, or coming up the wrong driveway?

        I think that whatever happens in NM (the order will expire before any injunction), a lot of people are standing up and applauding, and saying it's about time someone put their foot down.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Brianboyce

          I'm sure that it's not the case because I read statistics about this stuff in order to challenge my own experience prosecuting criminals. It is very rare for legal gun owners to commit crimes with their weapons, but it does happen. The wave of violence is caused by people who have already committed crimes not being punished sufficiently for carrying illegal weapons. A striking 5% of criminals commit 50% of violent crimes. Take that in for just a second and digest it. It's quite stunning. If we simply jailed serial violent criminals, we would solve half of hte problem. Going after legal gun owners without criminal records is futile. Worse, it legitimizes the radical gun owners who claim that politicians want to take their guns away for no reason.
          Mass shootings might get you excited and horrified (they do to me as well), but they are not a statistically significant factor in the gun violence that happens in our country. You're misguided if you think that one person, a politician, can legitimately declare an emergency outside of her constitutional and statutory writ without provoking (legitimately in this case) a wild reaction. It's not wise, it's not legal, and it's doomed to provoke a bad reaction.
          Better to elect people who believe what you do and to work within the law to effect the change you desire. This ain't North Korea, we have elections, we have a press.

          Collapse
    2. Russell J

      Strangely, escaped convicts can’t have guns legally and the people would be happy for the New Mexico governor to take his gun and leave law-abiding people alone. Also, escaping jail is illegal. It is like an object lesson on the limits of gun control.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Stephanie

        Maybe if there were not dozens of guns per each person in the US (including children) floating around, many not being stored properly (bedside tables?? leaning against the garage wall?), there would be many fewer opportunities for criminals to steal them, or use them against their owners.

        And a whole lot fewer people deciding to take the law into their own hands, deciding that their TV being stolen is a crime deserving of capital punishment.

        Or that black kids playing music in their car is grounds for squeezing off a few rounds.

        Collapse
        1. Russell J

          We aren’t going to agree on the morality. My argument is about the impracticality of banning guns when millions and millions exist. The NM Governor is doing a performative and ineffective act by attempting to add rules to the easiest group, rule followers. Rule breakers do not follow additional rules when they already lost respect for the authority of a basic rule such as “don’t steal” or “don’t commit murder”. Maybe it makes people feel warm but cops are not going to be searching our houses for guns b/c they don’t have enough time, it violates the Constitution, and it doesn’t do anything to prevent crimes.

          Collapse
  3. Phillyex1

    I agree with Jonah’s argument. Just because Trump is a worthless POS, doesn’t mean Biden deserves my vote. He doesn’t meet my criteria either between his leftist agenda and his own questionable ethics. It is not a binary choice. I can choose to vote for neither. And don’t tell me by not voting for Biden I’m actually voting for Trump. That won’t wash.

    Collapse
  4. Kevin M

    As a #NeverTrump gun owner living in the Albuquerque area, I find the governor's actions a bit more threatening that Nick does. There is actually a federal court decision from 1971 that says that the NM legislature cannot ban open carry (based in part on the NM state constitution). If a legislature cannot do it, it would suggest that any emergency powers they might create also cannot do it.

    I don't know why the injunction is taking so long.

    Collapse
  5. FreddySez

    First things first: Dispatch photo editor for the win!

    Worth noting:

    "If it saves one life, then it’s worth doing” isn't merely "false and even pernicious," it's also dangerously seductive. More than almost any political cliche in common use, it's a radical idea masquerading as a reasonable one.

    Try these on for size:

    "If mandating a 5 MPH national speed limit and cars made of Silly Putty saves one life, it's worth doing."

    "If banning all alcohol, saturated fat, and processed flour saves one life, it's worth doing."

    "If padding every surface of the Rocky Mountains saves one life, it's worth doing."

    Public policy decisions are tradeoffs, not absolutes. Pass a law about highway codes, product design, drug contents, import tariffs, food labeling... somewhere down the line, someone will probably die or not die as a (perhaps very indirect) result.

    To acknowledge this is not to be callous or evil. The idea is to stay away from the extremes. A policy decision that results in millions dying? That's a bad decision. A policy that results in not a single person dying? For reasons that may be harder to see, that's also a bad decision. Because to achieve that absolute end, other things have to swing far out of whack.

    "If it saves one life, then it’s worth doing” is an appeal to extremism, dangerous because it doesn't sound like one.

    Collapse
  6. Dougrhon

    Anyone paying attention to the left knows that most have little concern for constitutional norms. The tweets of teen activist David Hogg and Ted Lieu are clearly strategic, recognizing that this tyrannical step by the governor will harm the movement to limit and eventually end private gun ownership.

    Collapse
    1. Jackrabbit McQuivers

      Or maybe they respect the Constitution more than they're given credit for. Impossible to know. But assuming ill intent for every "good" action only reinforces that one side should hate the other side (and no, I'm not assuming you are on either side).

      Case in point: I think Trump was a bad president on about a hundred dimensions. But he signed a criminal justice reform bill that I think was good. I *could* choose to say "that was strategic; he really wants to do XYZ." Indeed, there's some reporting that it was a cold-blooded calculated move, and that he was furious later at Jared later for "making" him sign it. But I refuse to give that reporting any credence. Because who cares? How about we intentionally assume that all politicians are a mix of good and bad, and we work hard -- really hard -- to ascribe credit to the politicians we least like, when they do something positive. If we're unable to do that, then we're actively contributing to the negative polarization and partisanship.

      I have two rules of thumb when thinking about a candidate:
      1. Force myself to acknowledge the failures of a politician I like. If I'm unable to do that, I'm part of the problem.
      2. Force myself to find SOMETHING to like about a politician I dislike. If I'm unable to do that, I'm part of the problem.

      Collapse
      1. Dougrhon

        1. I'm not only talking about candidates. I'm talking about the world of the left. To claim that outside of a handful of liberals like Matt Taibbi, anyone on the left places adherence to constitutional limitations over the substance of their goals is to ignore the reality of the last decade. I sure wouldn't trust the so called new right to do so and only a very blind person would trust the illiberal left to do so.

        As far as politicians I assume NO good motives or designs to any of them. This is the worst political class in our entire history. My motto is in the words of Dylan "Don't follow leaders. Watch your parking meters." Anyone who actually "believes" in a politician in this day and age is a fool.

        Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      John N.

      It wasn't "the left" who staged a coup, tried to overthrow the legislative branch of the federal government, tried to overturn a free, fair and lawful election, sought to assassinate the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives and publicly hang the Vice President of the United States on the Capitol grounds.

      That was your team, "the right."

      So, yes, tell us more.about these constitutional norms you're.so.concerned about.

      🙄

      Collapse
      1. Emetz

        They were trying to stop the certification of the election...as bad as it was no one was trying to overthrow the government. Willfully trying to make it more than it was...and it was bad...doesn't help improve the overall political dialog. Also lumping everyone into two teams is sophomoric and representative of obtuse thinking.

        Collapse
        1. Jackrabbit McQuivers

          They were trying to stop the certification (as one of many planks of their plan) in order to use vague allegations and never-specified "evidence" to stop the peaceful transfer of power, throw the election to the House of Representatives, and change the outcome of the election, thus subverting the will of the electorate and putting themselves above electoral accountability. All without any judicial review of their reasons or evidence. I don't know ... that sounds pretty close to trying to overthrow the government (as represented by the outcome of the election). I grant you that that was a more convoluted process than, say, using the military to depose the President at gunpoint. But the fact that it was dressed up in legal briefs from John Eastman doesn't make it any less of an overthrow of the will of the electorate. And it would have permanently corrupted and canceled the concept of the peaceful transfer of power in America, fundamentally changing a core principle of America. One might say, overthrowing that principle.

          Collapse
        2. Avatar photo
          John N.

          LOL minimizing the attempt to overthrow the legislative branch of the federal government, by radicalized right-wing domestic terrorists, doesn't help improve the overall political dialogue very much, Emetz.

          As for "lumping everyone into two team" I think you meant to direct that to Dougrhon who was decrying "the left."

          I was just mocking him for his preferred team, who, ya know, did actually try to do everything I said.

          Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Retired Prosecutor

        They say that when you are a Manichean, nuance and shades of gray totally elude you. Here is an example.

        Collapse
      3. Dougrhon

        Do you think I would be on the Dispatch if Trump were "my team"? That's a pretty sad response. I guess Nick is on the team also since any criticism of the left puts you on that "team." About ten times a day I'm also called a leftist. Extremists are pathetic

        Collapse
        1. Kevin M

          Well, some here are on the Biden team, so I guess anything is possible. As far as Trump is concerned, I'm on Team Apoplexy.

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            John N.

            I'm not on Biden's team either, despite what a bunch of douches here say.

            Except if republican voters nominate Trump again. Then I'm team Biden all the way. I will always vote for the candidate with the strongest likelihood of defeating Trump.

            Always.

            Collapse
          2. Dougrhon

            I'm not on any team and would appreciate it if you didn't make such assumptions because I criticize the left.

            Collapse
  7. Richard Kropas

    The governor's declaration might have it's heart in the right place but it is a cowardly move. Inner city violence is endemic to certain communities but she needs the cover of a blanket decree so as not to appear biased. She would have been far better off if she brought back the tried & true NY policy of stop & frisk which nationwide would have saved thousands of lives since it was stopped for being "problematic". If I lived in a community that was unsafe for my children and grandchildren, I would not care any solution as their lives are all-important to me. Bring out the National Guard too!

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Mattjabour

    It is nice to see my party pushing back against such a flagrant disregard for rights, even on an issue we are frustrated with the lack of progress in. If there's one issue we can't let dissolve into hypocrisy and partisanship, it's abuse of authority.

    Collapse
  9. Nemmerle924

    >>> Something appears to have changed.

    What is it?

    Maybe, like Busse, they’re thinking strategically.<<<

    Maybe those advocates of more legal gun restrictions saw what happened with other progressive over-reach like "Defund the Police" and rightly conclude that over-reach in gun control will backfire, and create massive popular resistance to their agenda.

    Collapse
  10. Nemmerle924

    >>. It’s weird to find a liberal agreeing with them, let alone agreeing with them while trying to justify a policy of outlawing guns.<<

    It's NOT weird in a political block that shout DEFUND THE POLICE and supports rioting among thug-class groups in inner cities. It's completely consistent with a larger goal to make the criminal class dominant.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Magpie

      Oh, definitely. I'm sure every liberal gets out of bed in the morning wondering what they can do that day to make the criminal class more dominant!

      In case you don't get the sarcasm, I'm implying that your statement is utterly ridiculous.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        John N.

        Truly, and it is Marjorie Traitor Qreene and others of her ilk that are seeking to defund the police, and now these "conservatives" like Gym Jordan are looking to defund prosecutors too.

        Naturally JohnM will rush in to defend his pal Marge shortly. 🙄

        Collapse
Load More