[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Bang / Guns Title: Threat to private gun sales might be greater than threat to 'assault weapons' In the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, and its reprehensibly cynical exploitation by advocates of forcible citizen disarmament, decent American citizens have been preparing to defend against an all-out onslaught on so-called "assault weapons" and "high capacity" magazines. This is understandable. U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) has announced her intention to introduce a new federal ban--far more draconian than the one that expired in 2004, after 10 years of infringing on liberty and not saving any lives--on the first day of the 113th Congress, next January. The mass media is united in near-monolithic support of such a ban--with the New York Daily News actually pushing a lurid petition demanding it on every article about the shooting. Revisiting Mental Health, Gun Control Policy After Tragedy Revisiting Mental Health, Gun Control Policy After Tragedy National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea notes that even NRA-endorsed ostensibly "pro-gun" Democrats in Congress are now open to "having a conversation" about a new AWB--and then, of course, there are the anti-gun "Republicans." Still, such a ban would have to overcome a great deal of opposition--passage in the House seems quite unlikely, and even the Senate will be tough, especially if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) does not come through on his threat to exercise the "nuclear option" (no--not the CSGV version). Private sales--the so-called "gun show loophole," despite the fact that even anti-gun groups are no longer trying to hide the fact that they want to ban all private sales, whether at gun shows or not--might be a different story. The guns used in the Connecticut school massacre were not purchased at a gun show, and certainly not purchased without a background check (and the purchaser, Nancy Lanza, would apparently have been very unlikely to be found "unsuitable" to purchase firearms even under the ever more restrictive and intrusive background checks pushed by anti-gun fanatics). And that will make no difference to those hoping to exploit the murdered children of Newton, Connecticut for the agenda of a private sales ban. There is mass public outrage, and if channeled by the gun ban lobby and a compliant mass media into anger against guns and gun owners in general, that outrage can be wielded as a political bludgeon against all facets of gun ownership, with or without relevance to the atrocity that prompted the outrage in the first place. Also making no difference to those who would ban private sales is the lack of any link between gun shows and violent crime in general, because if "gun control" advocates have their way, logic will be kept out of the debate entirely. The Brady Campaign seems to see private sales ban as "lower hanging fruit" than a new AWB. Monday night, the PBS Newshour discussed "gun control," seeking the perspectives of Brady Campaign president Dan Gross, prominent Second Amendment attorney Dave Kopel, a psychologist and a pediatrician (see sidebar video). Although senior correspondent Judy Wooodruff asked Gross about banning so-called "assault weapons," he quickly turned the subject to private sales, leading Woodruff to (understandably) believe that he thought a private sales ban should be pursued instead of a new AWB. Gross was quick to deny that that was his intent, but nevertheless chided Kopel for continuing to talk about "assault weapons," rather than private sales. This is not because Gross does not passionately want a new AWB--he certainly does. Presumably, though, he sees a private sales ban as being a more attainable goal in the short term. He is probably right. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) has (in)famously pushed hard to close the "gun show loophole," (Rick Santorum is another supposedly "conservative Republican" who has advocated closing the mythical "loophole") and even as late as 2008, at the NRA convention, stated that he believed "an accurate, fair and instant background check at guns shows is a reasonable requirement." Even so, the NRA endorsed him for president mere months afterward. As the Sipsey Street Irregulars' Mike Vanderboegh frequently states, "Not even King George the Third was so grasping" as to attempt to impose such intrusive control over private commerce between individuals. Even so, patriotic Americans--before the term "Americans" really had much meaning--fought and won a seemingly unwinnable war to get out from under his tyranny. That kind of defiant spirit is desperately needed in America once again.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
#1. To: A K A Stone (#0)
(Edited)
In other words, NICS background checks are worthless. The FFL system is a bureaucratic boondoggle, and the ATF causes a lot more crime than it prevents.
There are no replies to Comment # 1. End Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|