Nick Freitas – Speaking Truth To Power And The Opposition Proves His Point.

Nick Freitas is a member of the Virginia House of Representatives where as a Republican, he represents the people if Culpepper, Virginia.

Last week Freitas rose and gave an impassioned speech on guns, gun control, facts, debates and discussions.

In his speech, Freitas urged his fellow lawmakers to have an “open and honest debate” that relied on “data, facts, evidence, analysis, reason, logic, etc., etc.” (No wonder Democrats were triggered).

He pointed out that most mass shootings seem to occur in “gun-free zones” and that the shooters tend to come from broken homes.

“Wouldn’t it reasonable to test whether or not the efficacy of gun-free zones have actually achieved what their intended intent is?” he asked. “What sort of government policies have actually encouraged broken homes?”

He encouraged his fellow lawmakers to analyze the crime rates in the areas around the country where strict gun control laws are in place.

“Whether it’s Chicago, New York City, Washington, D.C., and others that have incredibly strict gun laws and yet for some reason, hasn’t seemed to stop the gun violence in those particular areas,” Freitas said.

He also suggested that lawmakers look at “the number of cases within the United States where a gun has been used for self-defense.”

We agree. Shouldn’t any debate and discussion on guns and “gun control” include facts and not just emotion?

Freitas continued and addressed the idea that Democrats weren’t looking to ban and confiscate weapons:

Because, quite frankly, I don’t think any of us on this side of the aisle believe you when you say that’s all you want to do,” he said. “It’ll be bump stocks, it’ll be background checks, it’ll be different kinds of background checks that register the guns, then after that, it will be ‘we have to ban assault weapons,'” he argued. “What’s an assault weapon?” he asked rhetorically. “Something that looks scary.”

Freitas continued: “Then after that, it will be semiautomatic rifles, after that, it will be semiautomatic handguns, then it’ll be revolvers, shotguns. Because when the policies fail to produce the results you are promising to your constituents, you’ll be back with more reasons on why we’ve gotta infringe on Second Amendment rights.”

Another reason why it’s difficult to have an honest and open debate on gun policy, Freitas argued, is because Democrats are always comparing Republicans to Nazis and segregationists.

This is where Freitas really unleashed.

“I just want to remind everyone very quickly, it was not our [Republican] party that supported slavery, that fought women’s suffrage, that rounded up tens of thousands of Asian-Americans and put them in concentration camps, that supported Jim Crow, that supported segregation, or supported mass resistance. That wasn’t our party, that was the Democrat party!” he said.

Freitas was gracious enough to acknowledge that he doesn’t believe any Democrats in the chamber actually believe any of those things today, but added, “I would be really appreciative if every time you want to make a powerful point, you don’t project the sins, the atrocities and the injustices the Democratic party perpetrated on others onto us.”

Faced with a rational, reasoned call for debate and discussion, some Democrats walked out of the House Chambers saying Freitas was being “offensive”:

Del. Delores McQuinn, D-Richmond, who walked off the floor Friday rather than listen to Freitas, also rose Monday to address what she called “insensitivity and disrespect” that deflected from the issue of gun violence.

“Let us not bring in things that would be hurtful and painful to people who have to live in a skin that some of you will never know and have to endure a reality that being black in America is sometimes difficult,” McQuinn, who is African-American, told the majority-white chamber.

“Every now and then some of the things that we do say … we mean one thing. But boy it can turn out to be something else,” said Del. Luke Torian, D-Prince William, an African-American legislator known for having a close working relationship with Republican leaders.

It didn’t end there:

During Monday’s floor session, Del. Lamont Bagby, D-Henrico, the chairman of the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus, called Freitas’ comments “hateful and divisive,” adding that he wanted to put all legislators on notice that “our heritage will not be used as a political football.”

Bagby said many Democrats saw Freitas’ comments — suggesting “abortion, welfare, family structure and a litany of other stereotypes” are also factors in the gun-violence problem — as racial “dog whistling.”

“We realize that we live in a ugly political moment. So while we were offended, we were not surprised,” Bagby said. “It should embarrass every member of this body that we have allowed such rhetoric to enter these chambers. Bringing up a very painful past to make a political point is disgusting and poisonous.”

So democrats were “offended” that Freitas told the truth about the past of the Democratic Party? Cry us a river.

Democrats have never stopped using the Republican actions in the past as a club, but when the tables are turned, the Democrats are “offended.”

Instead, Democrats just want to demonize their opponents, “comparing members on this side of the aisle to Nazis,” he said, referring to an email Del. Mark Levine (D-Alexandria) sent out to supporters last month that slammed Republicans for supporting assault weapons similar to those “created by Nazi Germany.”

Freitas criticized a letter from a 24-year-old teacher, which Del. Dawn Adams (D-Richmond) read a few days ago, in which the teacher said she worried that politicians were debating between the Second Amendment and her life. And Freitas was especially upset, he said, by a recent comment from Del. Ken Plum (D-Fairfax) comparing the gun rights issue to segregation.

Freitas said that if Democrats want to have an honest debate on gun issues, it should “start with a certain degree of mutual respect.” They shouldn’t assume he has been bought off by the NRA, he said, and he wouldn’t assume Democrats were paid off by Planned Parenthood.

Spot on.

Freitis is running for the Senate seat currently held by Tom Kaine (D.) It is plausible that he is using this issue to garner support for his election. We hate to be that cynical, but we have been burned by politicians saying one thing to get elected and then doing another thing one in office.

No matter what his motives, we should all recognize that until we deal with facts instead of rhetoric and ad hominem attacks, things will never get better.

Comments are closed.