The Left in this country looks at the Second Amendment as nothing more than something to be overcome. Even armed leftist groups, like the John Brown Gun Club, aren't actually fans of the Second Amendment. They just utilize it because it's convenient.
If they had their way, it would be "guns for me but not for thee."
Unfortunately, President Donald Trump took a similar stand in the aftermath of Alex Pretti's shooting.
Yet a writer for Salon seems to think that this isn't just a bad choice of words, but the abolition of the Second Amendment.
How can I say that? Well, it starts with the title, which actually says, "Trump abolishes Second Amendment."
Then we get to the meat of writer Mike Lofgren's screed:
This is the about-face of Donald Trump, the cronies he has placed in office and a large portion of the Republican base on the issue of firearms and the sanctity of Second Amendment rights. By now, everyone knows about the unprovoked killing of demonstrator Alex Pretti by federal agents Jesus Ochoa and Raymundo Gutierrez, and the horrified reaction of the president (“you can’t have guns”) and his flaks that Pretti had a pistol (which he did not draw or threaten the officers with).
Whatever happened to Republicans’ reverence not only for firearms ownership, but legal carry, either concealed or open, as well as their ingrained suspicion of federal law enforcement agencies? This abrupt change for a party that only recently was enamored of “Second Amendment solutions” and the public brandishing of AR-15s can be found in the post-World War II history of conservatives and guns.
...There are no rules in politics anymore, and If Democrats wanted to be anything more than a moribund, fake opposition party, they would eagerly adopt the slogan that Trump has abolished the Second Amendment and spread the news far and wide. Given the opinions of the Democratic base on gun-rights absolutism, it wouldn’t mobilize many of their own voters, although it would continue to remind them of what happened in Minneapolis.
Would it work on Republicans? Nothing is likely to cause them to vote Democratic, but it might depress their turnout (in the same way GOP turnout fell in the 2025 off-year elections) while causing confusion and discomfiture among the GOP hierarchy. More important, it could peel away a reasonable number of Republican-leaning swing voters in battleground states. And who knows, miracle of miracles, the Second Amendment might finally cause John Fetterman to support his own party rather than Trump.
This is what mental disability looks like.
Trump made some comments that many of us Second Amendment supporters are less than thrilled about. He's been called out by every gun rights group out there to some extent or another for them, too.
But it's a leap of Olympic-level proportions to claim that saying someone can't do something they actually can means they've abolished the Second Amendment. That's not even remotely accurate, especially since Lofgren's own party plays host to California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is literally trying to abolish the Second Amendment via his own 28th Amendment proposal.
Lofgren talks about hypocrisy, but this is the epitome of the term.
As it stands, there has been no legislation proposed that would address Alex Pretti and his gun possession. All we have are words that we might not like, but that don't seem to be morphing into anything else.
The fact that Lofgren writes for Slate is evidence that the outlet has no problem serving as a jobs program for the mentally disabled who might not otherwise find work. It should be classified as charity on their part, even though I know their editors actually pumped their fists at this diatribe.
If you had any doubts that the Left is bat-guano insane, this should dispel them. They don't even know what it takes to abolish an amendment, for crying out loud.
