There is a general correlation between the increase in powers claimed by the state and the necessary reduction in rights retained by individuals and traditional social structures.
If you think that someone wants your rifle specifically because you might use it if they try to take your burger, then that's a bit out there.
Metric said:
The point is that enacting something like the "green new deal" would be absolutely catastrophic for a lot of people. Banning cattle, fossil fuels, and enacting a socialist wish list (e.g. government paychecks for anyone unwilling to work) would have major, major consequences.
It's been having major consequences for most of a century. Why link it to gun restrictions in this election cycle?
No party is going to ban cattle and fossil fuels; socialists like beef and jets too. They may cynically appeal to school kids who believe a lot of nonsense and think they'll never be old with a job and a mortgage, but there has always been that sort of young person. Media give that sort too much good press and they over represent them, imo.
An illustration of the distance between what people say and what they do can be observed in the faction in the House who call publicly for impeachment and can't stop talking to cameras about the grounds for impeachment, yet refuse to actually begin the process of impeachment. They know there is a market for rash rhetoric amongst those who woke up on November 9, 2016 and felt robbed of a sure victory.
I would guess that most of the force behind greater gun restrictions comes from voters who aren't familiar with guns, don't like hearing about problems, and don't care about you, what you like or your rights. For them, their own half-baked whim is reason enough to leave you less free.
