Matthew McConaughey Has A Warning About “March For Our Lives” Extremists’ Intentions…

Matthew McConaughey believes in implementing further gun control measures and was actually a speaker at a “March for Our Lives” event in Austin. He ALSO respects gun owners and NRA members, and understands that there may be differences of opinion.

I totally respect that. I respect people who have different opinions than I do, but are willing to have sensible conversations about it.

They are few and far between. McConaughey seems to be one of them.

While McConaughey DOES agree with what “March for Our Lives” claims to stand for… he also warns that leftists will use the movement to institute support for a blanket gun ban.

He DOESN’T agree with this… and he’s warning people about it.

According to Daily Wire:

Actor Matthew McConaughey supports certain gun control measures and even spoke at the “March for Our Lives” in his hometown of Austin, Texas, despite McConaughey’s fear that the youth-led movement will be “hijacked” by extremists who wish to take people’s guns away.

Agree and disagree.

I think some of those kids have really good intentions. I think they’re being used as pawns by many of the high-dollar organizers of “March for our Lives,” who have ulterior gun-grabbing agendas.

So in that way, the “hijackers” he speaks of are actually the organizers themselves.

Speaking at the CinemaCon theater-owners convention on Monday, McConaughey said gun violence is “an epidemic in our country” that he hopes to curtail without taking guns away from people.

“I’ve got a lot of friends who are gun owners. I’ve got a lot of friends who are NRA (National Rifle Association). I grew up hunting. We had responsible gun ownership, but I was taught the right way to respect that tool,” he said. “At the same time, their petition that they were speaking about is a very good one. And I also fear that their campaign — they have to watch that they don’t get hijacked. Meaning, a lot of the crowd was for no guns at all. That was not the march for life. March for Our Lives was for rightful, just, responsible gun ownership — but against assault rifles, against unlimited magazines and for following up on the regulations.”

I think that’s a fair assessment.

I don’t even disagree with all of it.

Obviously, I don’t agree with any sort of ban on semi-automatic weapons. That’s just idiotic. I would have also expected better from him than BS about “assault rifles” because that’s not even a thing at this point, and um… how do unlimited magazines work? Because that’s pretty high-tech. Just infinite ammo? Is this magic?

I DO think that certain existing things should be revisited. For example, all signs point to the fact that the Sutherland Springs shooter should NOT have been able to legally buy a gun because he was dishonorably discharged, but that he was able to due to a failure in the system.

I have no problem with us revisiting those systems and making sure that those who should not be able to buy a weapon are accounted for.

See? Compromise.

McConaughey ultimately hopes that a middle-ground can be reached between the to parties so that the epidemic can be curtailed.

“The two sides (have) got to talk. Because we both agree that there’s an epidemic,” he said. “We both agree something has got to change. So I was for what they were marching for, and I wanted to speak to my hometown on the capital of my state Texas’ steps. And also talk to the many men and women who I grew up with, I know that had the guns, that owned the guns, and say, ‘hey, do we really, where can we reach across the aisle here? Find a compromise for the betterment of all of us?’

While some conservatives may disagree with some of McConaughey’s proposals on gun control, at least he welcomes debate on the issue and gives his opponents dignity rather than shouting them down as a “murderer” as many did to Dana Loesch during the CNN town hall.

Yup. HUUUGE improvement.