President Donald Trump ran on a number of issues, as any successful candidate must. One of those was immigration.
Now, we don’t talk a lot about illegal immigration here, or immigration in general. Why would we? The path of gun rights/gun control and immigration don’t cross all that often. It’s happened a time or two, but not regularly.
As a result, we didn’t really delve too deeply into some of what Trump has said regarding immigration.
But David Codrea did, and he sees a potential pitfall in one aspect of Trump’s plan. See, one group that Codrea notes seem particularly eager to take advantage of this are wealthy Indians.
You can be forgiven for presuming headlines like “Rich Indians scramble to apply for EB-5 Visa” appearing in The Economic Times mean they’re looking out for themselves. And it’s understandable if that raises questions about where ultimate loyalties really lie, particularly with oxymoronic “dual citizenship” options and a 2015 change from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services regarding the oath taken by naturalization candidates: They are longer required “to declare that they will ‘bear arms on behalf of the United States’ and ‘perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States.’”
Most are opposed to anyone outside of the government bearing arms, and it’s safe to assume once granted citizenship, they’ll vote that way. The New York Times even bragged about it in its 2019 article “How Voters Turned Virginia from Deep Red to Solid Blue”: “Guns, that is the most pressing issue for me,’ said Vijay Katkuri, 38, a software engineer from southern India, explaining why he voted for a Democratic challenger in Tuesday’s elections.”
Okay, but that’s an anecdote. What about “pro-gun” Republicans like Vivek Ramaswamy and Kash Patel? First, their willingness to make substantive changes has not yet been tested, but even if their actions end up matching their rhetoric, they’re exceptions to the rule. While there are great patriots of all heritage backgrounds who are ardent Second Amendment defenders, they are in the extreme minority. Per India Currents, “A 2022 Asian American Voter Survey, AAPI Data found that 83% of Indian Americans believe the U.S. needs stricter gun laws.”
Trump with his “gold card” proposes making citizens of foreign nationals who will have substantial resources to impose their political preferences on their host country. And he’s doubled down on a “pathway to citizenship” for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) “Dreamers,” prioritizing “cheap labor Republicans” who ally themselves on immigration with electorate-padding Democrats over gun owners who put him in office.
And, to be fair, Codrea has a point.
This “gold card” would fast-track people into citizenship who aren’t really that interested in sharing in our American values, including the right to keep and bear arms. What’s more, it’ll put them at the head of the line. While this might make financial sense from a business perspective–and Trump is a businessman, after all–it might ultimately create problems for our gun rights as these folks aren’t people who generally have to worry about defending themselves. They’re wealthy. They can hire security, which is something I touched on earlier today.
Being American is supposed to be about more than the amount of money in your bank account. It’s about personal liberty and valuing the things that make this nation unique among all the nations of the world.
If people can just buy their way into citizenship, especially if they’re here purely for economic reasons and have no love for the United States as a nation beyond that, then they’re going to vote for the kinds of things that go against our American way of life.
Sure, we’ll still get some of those even without the “gold card” thing, but we’ll also likely see the hard-working middle-class aspiring type that want a better life and know what life is like when you have to deal with the worst of humanity. They’re less likely to favor gun control and could work as a check on the elites who think everyone who can’t afford private bodyguards should just take their chances.
At the very least, it’s something we need to discuss going forward.
Read the full article here
