I said it. I stand by it. He may not be progressive/liberal/left in many things, but he is not a conservative. At least not in the American sense.
I'm not a conservative either, I'm much, much worse. I'm a borderline anarchist. I'm a right-leaning libertarian who gives leftists nightmares, and the only thing we libertarians hate more than statists and commies are fake libertarians.
Democrats and Republicans can both be libertarians and we love them, but what does it mean to be a fake libertarian? Well for starters, it means paying lip service to freedom while actively trying to undermine it. Like making it easier to take away firearms from citizens without due process.
Mr. Crenshaw has been trying to obfuscate and do damage control ever since he supported "red flag" laws like TAPS (which died in committee), and a version of it in the NDAA bill (page 293) which passed [Correction: the NDAA bill was passed by the House after that section was removed. My mistake. Still needs to pass the Senate, however]. More here, and here. Think of the red flag law in the NDAA as a closed beta test (active military), after which the general public will get the full release. [The red flag laws in blue states will serve as beta tests just fine, if they can avoid an honest court]
Naturally, this rubs me and many others the wrong way. Even if I didn't care about guns, I do care about the right to keep and carry them. And even if I didn't care about that, I do care about people having rights being taken away without full due process of law. Due process is precariously hanging on as it is in this country, why must we create paths around it?
We don't need to scrap due process, nor the 2nd amendment to meaningfully and effectively put an end to gun crimes. Failure to protect lives and liberty at the same time is a failure of imagination. Much like Crenshaw's gaslighting.
