HLN conservative host S.E. Cupp followed up her masterful takedown of self-righteous journalists who become anti-gun activists, last Thursday, by using the opening monologue of Tuesday’s S.E. Cupp Unfiltered to call out disingenuous gun grabbers for lying about their intentions. “There is nothing more disingenuous than the idea that no one is talking about banning guns,” Cupp declared.
Cupp began the show by slamming actress Alyssa Milano for sending out an “inane” tweet spewing hate for the Second Amendment because it was passed during a time when smallpox and dying during childbirth were “popular.”
“What Milano tweeted may be inane, but what’s problematic is that other inane ideas masquerade and serious and actually get considered. People say all kinds of crazy things in a desperate attempt to quote, ‘do something,’” Cupp cautioned.
She then became extremely serious and warned of a liberal narrative every law-abiding gun owner would surely come across. “But here’s the deal. I want you to be very aware of one narrative that pops up over and over and over again. It is this idea that ‘no one is talking about taking your guns away,’” Cupp warned. “You will hear it all over the news. You will hear it from lawmakers. They will dismiss the idea that taking your guns away is what anyone is talking about.”
“But you should know, any time someone says ‘they are not talking about taking your guns away,’ what they mean is, ‘they are talking about taking your guns away,’” Cupp added. She followed up by showing video of evidence of President Obama and Hillary Clinton asserting they weren’t going to take guns away and then saying the exact opposite later. She also noted the two-faced-ness of former Republican Joe Scarborough on the subject:
S.E. CUPP: I listen to the news when they say things like this.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Nobody wants to take their shotguns away. Nobody wants to take their handguns away. They can't because that's unconstitutional now because of the Heller—because of D.C. versus Heller in 2008. They can't do it.
CUPP: And I continue to listen when in the very next breath they then say this.
SCARBOROUGH: We need to take away these weapons of war. Look at these mass shootings.
Cupp also noted conservative turncoat and New York Times columnist Bret Stephens: “When columnists, like so-called conservative Bret Stephens, take to the pages of The New York Times and say it is time to repeal the second amendment, I listen to that and believe him.”
“They will say they are not coming for your self-defense gun or for your hunting rifle, but this is where definitions really matter and why the term “assault weapon” is so odious and slippery. It’s such an ambiguous term that neither the federal government nor individual states have a single definition,” she expertly stated.
After going through varied definitions concerning the firearm, she spoke about the shift in liberal terminology for the weapons. “Maybe that's why people like Joe Scarborough are now calling them ‘weapons of war,’ an even more ill-defined and vague but scary sounding term,” Cupp surmised. “So, it is completely possible that an assault weapons ban would make your hunting rifle or self-defense handgun illegal.”
“This stuff matters and anyone that says it doesn't is just trying to bully you away from facts and towards fist shaking emotion,” she argued shortly before going to the discussion.
While some might try to hide their discussions regarding taking your guns away, others talk about it out in the open. Just as NBC moderator Chuck Todd did during Sunday’s Meet the Press and CBS did during Monday’s Evening News when they were touting the demands of Parkland students.
Transcript below, click expand to read:
HLN
S.E. Cupp Unfiltered
February 20, 2018
5:01:31 PM Eastern [4 minutes 50 seconds](…)
S.E. CUPP: But in the wake of yet another tragic mass shooting absurd rises to the top. What Milano tweeted may be inane, but what’s problematic is that other inane ideas masquerade and serious and actually get considered. People say all kinds of crazy things in a desperate attempt to quote, “do something.”
Here on this show, we have been highlighting some possible well-considered potentially lifesaving solutions from the left, from the right and everywhere in between. I will continue to highlight those solutions because I think it is an important conversation. I am not afraid of having it.
But here’s the deal. I want you to be very aware of one narrative that pops up over and over and over again. It is this idea that “no one is talking about taking your guns away.” You will hear it all over the news. You will hear it from lawmakers. They will dismiss the idea that taking your guns away is what anyone is talking about. But you should know, any time someone says “they are not talking about taking your guns away,” what they mean is, “they are talking about taking your guns away.”
How do I know this? Because I listen. I listen when someone says this.
BARACK OBAMA: I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe in people's lawful right to bear arms. I will not take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away.
CUPP: And I also listen when they say this.
OBAMA: We should restore the ban on military-style assault weapons and a ten round limit for magazines.
CUPP: I listen to people when they say this.
HILLARY CLINTON: I'm not here to take away your guns. I just don't want you to be shot by someone who shouldn't have a gun in the first place.
CUPP: And I listen when they also say this.
CLINTON: And I think it's time to restore the ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.
CUPP: I listen to the news when they say things like this.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Nobody wants to take their shotguns away. Nobody wants to take their handguns away. They can't because that's unconstitutional now because of the Heller—because of D.C. versus Heller in 2008. They can't do it.
CUPP: And I continue to listen when in the very next breath they then say this.
SCARBOROUGH: We need to take away these weapons of war. Look at these mass shootings.
CUPP: I listen to Senator Dianne Feinstein who introduced an assault weapons ban last year, saying she only wants to take away the bad ones. But I also listened to her in 1993 when she sold the Associated Press that, quote, “Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of Americans to feel safe.”
When columnists, like so-called conservative Bret Stephens, take to the pages of The New York Times and say it is time to repeal the second amendment, I listen to that and believe him. I listen when in response to the shooting in Florida state Senator Gary farmer tweets: “They're in the capital. These kids will be lobbying both chambers today for common sense gun safety legislation.” So, what’s he talking about when he wants “common sense” gun laws? Well, he says “we need an assault weapons ban in Florida. The time for change is now.”
They will say they are not coming for your self-defense gun or for your hunting rifle, but this is where definitions really matter and why the term “assault weapon” is so odious and slippery. It’s such an ambiguous term that neither the federal government nor individual states have a single definition.
The 1994 ban defined an assault weapon as a rifle or pistol that has a detachable magazine and at least two other military features like a bayonet mount, a flash suppressor, or a pistol grip. Most of those features are cosmetics and don’t necessarily make a gun more powerful. States that have assault weapons bans don't even agree on what they are and define them differently.
Maybe that's why people like Joe Scarborough are now calling them “weapons of war,” an even more ill-defined and vague but scary sounding term. So, it is completely possible that an assault weapons ban would make your hunting rifle or self-defense handgun illegal. This stuff matters and anyone that says it doesn't is just trying to bully you away from facts and towards fist shaking emotion.
Over the coming days, weeks, maybe even months, you will hear a spectrum of proposals to prevent more mass shootings. In fact, just an hour ago, the President announced he has directed Attorney General Jeff sessions to propose regulations that would ban bump stocks, devices that turn ordinary rifles into automatic weapons. That's good. We welcome all these proposals, but there is nothing more disingenuous than the idea that no one is talking about banning guns. So let's have that conversation and get everyone's cards out on the table.
(…)
