By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Jon Stewart expressed outrage at the right-wing’s attempts to justify the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by focusing on his legal firearm. He highlighted the hypocrisy, contrasting the current stance with the right’s previous defense of individuals like Kyle Rittenhouse. Stewart sarcastically questioned whether the right was abandoning its Second Amendment principles, especially given their willingness to sacrifice core values for Donald Trump. Ultimately, Stewart found it most shocking that the right had abandoned its entire political worldview for someone they believe does not care.
Read the original article here
MAGA’s Sudden Hatred for Guns
The sudden shift in MAGA’s stance on guns, as highlighted by Jon Stewart, is a head-scratcher, to put it mildly. It’s truly mind-blowing to witness the apparent abandonment of a core principle – the staunch defense of the Second Amendment – by a group that has historically championed it so vocally.
The core of the issue is quite simple: Republicans, and now MAGA, seem to operate on the principle of different rules for them versus everyone else. They don’t just dislike liberals, LGBTQ+ individuals, immigrants, and minorities; they appear to harbor a disdain for democracy itself, and this shapes their stance on everything, including gun rights. Jon Stewart put it perfectly, questioning the very foundation of their beliefs. If the Second Amendment is supposed to be a “load-bearing wall,” how can they so easily abandon it?
This apparent change in heart isn’t about principle; it’s about power and tribalism. As the saying goes, if Donald Trump came out in support of abortion tonight, a significant portion of MAGA would likely flip their stance by morning. This demonstrates a disturbing lack of conviction, a tendency to blindly follow their leader, regardless of the issue. The reality is, it’s a cult of personality.
The history books are filled with examples that prove the point. When armed Black people or left-leaning groups begin exercising their Second Amendment rights, suddenly there’s a push for “sensible gun safety.” This is nothing new; it’s a tactic used repeatedly throughout history, and it is a blatant example of hypocrisy. The hypocrisy is the crux of the problem.
Frank Wilhoit’s observation encapsulates the essence of this behavior: conservatives often believe that the law should protect only their in-group, while the out-group is bound by the law but not protected by it. This applies perfectly to the gun debate. It’s guns for us, not for them. And if the “them” starts arming themselves, then the tune quickly changes.
The frustration is understandable. Seeing the same people who screamed about the Second Amendment and child death tragedies suddenly shift their stance because of one person is astonishing. They will support anyone who will let them have the ability to kill the people they deem their enemies without consequences. They will say whatever is necessary. The irony is staggering. They’ve long said “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.”
The left often believes the words they say; the right just says whatever is needed to get the desired reaction. It’s a fundamental difference in how they approach communication and policy. The core of the conservative movement isn’t about any specific issue; it’s about maintaining their position in a perceived hierarchy. They will sacrifice core values to maintain the illusion of being on the “good guys'” side. They don’t want people to have a weapon. They just want the privilege of it for themselves.
MAGA seems to care most about being the privileged class, even if it means betraying their stated principles. They don’t hate guns. They have to do whatever Trump says, and they must assume that Trump’s staff is carrying out his orders! This makes it even more frustrating to watch.
The key to understanding Republicans is twofold: they feel no shame and disregard hypocrisy, and they believe there should be separate rules for them than for the rest of society. It’s this mindset that makes their sudden shift on guns, and so many other issues, both predictable and infuriating.