Call it what you like, media spinning or political rhetoric, but the latest political lingo to slam the public stage is “modest” gun control. What, in fact, is modest about any form of gun control? To answer this question, we take a look at the well-used political ploy that is known as semantic change.

Semantic change is defined as word usage evolving. This means that the meaning of a word progresses, or changes, over time.

When analyzing the definition of “modest,” we know this definition is defined as something that is generally unassuming or moderate, meaning middle of the road.

Therefore, when you combine the latest political jargon that is floating around media outlets nationwide, we analyze the term “modest gun control.” The United States Constitution clearly states that the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment “shall not be infringed.” This means that under no circumstances should this law be impeded or violated in any way. Any first-year law student will agree that to “control” this amendment is infringe upon the public’s rights. However, as a society, we have strayed so far from the actual imputed wording within the Constitution that we are allowing politicians to make up their own semantic-style definitions.

By nature, there is nothing “modest” about infringement. In fact, “infringement” is defined as an action that breaks the terms of an agreement or law, thus resulting in a violation. It is also noted that infringement includes the action of undermining or limiting something, whether it be by a minute degree or a significantly measureable amount.

This brings us to the political conundrum that is a slippery slope. A slippery slope is the simple argument that a small first step leads to a chain reaction, thus causing a drastic slide. Gun rights advocates argue that “modest gun control” is simply political jargon reworded to appeal to the public, which will ultimately give way to a drastic slippery slope that limits the gun ownership and rights of American citizens.

When political action ultimately involves the intent to disarm citizens, the term “modest” becomes subject to semantic change and let’s face it, the government is just afraid to call this what is really is: a regime of Absolutism control.

Instead of simply standing by, as so many people have done for the past 51 years, citizens should protest how the government is simply regurgitating their original agenda into one that involves playing on words. Consider this brief history:

In 1962, Emanual Cellar and Thomas J. Dodd proposed a federal law that related to common firearm ownership.

  • 1962 – “We don’t want to take away your guns, we ONLY want to register handguns! Rifles and shotguns will not be affected.”
  • 1964 – “We only want to register all your guns, not ban them! Only Army surplus guns will be banned.”
  • 1968 – “We only want to register your guns, and ban “Saturday Night Specials” and small foreign handguns along with Army surplus rifles.
  • 1970 – “We only want to ban Saturday night specials! Large handguns and rifles will not be affected!”
  • 1976 – “We only want to ban all handguns! Long guns will not be affected!”
  • 1981 – “The NRA is a rifle organization! They should give up their handguns, and they can keep their rifles!”
  • 1984 – “We must ban ‘assault rifles…!’”
  • 1989 – President George Bush bans importing select foreign-made “assault rifles.”
  • 1992 – President Clinton passed the Brady Bill assault rifle ban.
  • 2000 – First attempt to ban single shot .50 caliber rifles.

And the list continues to grow! Politicians lied to Americans in 1962 and they continue to lie to us today.

For citizens that want to voice their dissension and send a message to big government, contact local and state representatives and just say “No” to semantic gun control.

Techna Clip is a supporter of concealed carry and Second Amendment rights. They carry a variety of LCP Ruger accessories, including their best selling Ruger Ic9 belt clip.