How the Aftermath of Administration Comments Against Guns Will be Played in Midterms

People say things off the cuff all the time that they later regret. Stuff like, “That Jeffrey Epstein seems like a great guy,” or, “Your sister is hot, honey.”

Yeah, not great moves, to be sure.

In the aftermath of Alex Pretti being shot and killed, the administration was full of people who stepped up to automatically defend ICE, but they did so by attacking Pretti, and not just for being there, but for being there while armed, with spare magazines.

It wasn’t a good look, to say the least.

We’ve called them out on it, and I’m not letting anything slide, even if I happen to think that the Trump administration was still the only viable outcome of the 2024 election for gun owners.

However, with the midterms coming later this year, we’re starting to get a preview of how the left will frame those comments as they decry Trump as a fascist yet again.

And it’s not great for Republicans.

After the murder of nurse Alex Pretti in Minneapolis by a Border Patrol agent and a Customs and Border Protection officer, the president told reporters, “You can’t have guns. You can’t walk in with guns.” And on Monday, Trump’s sycophantic U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeanine Pirro, stated to Fox News that anyone who brings a firearm into the city can expect to go to jail. “I don’t care if you have a license in another district and I don’t care if you’re a law-abiding gun owner somewhere else.”

Trump and his MAGA underlings have decided, in other words, that the Second Amendment—long an inviolable part of Republican orthodoxy—does not apply to anti-ICE protesters. This has dismayed not only guns rights groups but even some Republican lawmakers. “Why is a ‘conservative’ judge threatening to arrest gun owners?” Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky asked on X. Representative Greg Steube of Florida tweeted at Pirro, “I bring a gun into the district every week…. I have a license in Florida and DC to carry. And I will continue to carry to protect myself and others.” Of course, they were in the minority: Most Republicans have remained silent, tacitly acknowledging that they don’t have absolutist positions on gun rights and states’ rights after all.

Now, this is from The New Republic, which leans so far left that they might as well be upside down, but do you think that these comments aren’t going to be used in the midterms? Do you think that the silence of some Republican lawmakers won’t be brought up during the general election?

No, the far left anti-gunners don’t suddenly think they can woo gun owners to their side. They’re hoping we’ll be so disgusted we’ll just stay home and refuse to vote for anyone at all.

For them, that’s just as much of a win.

Granted, this piece ignores Pirro’s walkback of her earlier comments, which I still found lacking to some degree, but were far better than what she initially said, without actually contradicting herself. That soothed some feathers, didn’t soothe many others, and is less likely to be turned around in the midterms than what Trump, Kash Patel, and Steve Bessent said, among others.

The issue is and will remain that the passing comments about Pretti will be used. They’re being taken to mean that the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to all, and they will be trotted out as a soundbite in gun debates for years to come.

It won’t matter if they’re off-the-cuff comments or not. It won’t matter that they’re never acted upon. We’re dealing with a mainstream media outright hostile toward Republicans in general, and the right to keep and bear arms in particular.

They’re never letting this rest.

At least your wife might get over you thinking her sister is hot. 

Maybe.

Editor’s Note: The mainstream media continues to lie about gun owners and the Second Amendment. 

Help us continue to expose their left-wing bias by reading news you can trust. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.